[e-lang] Content Complete, Ready for Comments
Ka-Ping Yee
e-lang at zesty.ca
Mon Jun 27 11:05:54 EDT 2005
I'll be submitting my comments piecemeal, since it's kind of a slow
process. Here are comments on the first two chapters (please excuse
the blunt tone of each -- they are curt only for expediency).
Hope this helps. More to come.
1. Introduction
================
- Instead, we make use of mechanisms of abstraction
+ We make use of mechanisms for abstraction
"Instead" is repeated in the preceding sentence.
- whose compositions we can again understand without fully understanding
- the components being composed.
+ whose compositions we can understand without fully understanding every
+ component being composed.
This wording is clearer.
- To understand these twin problems, of separating components and of
- composing them [...] massive number of conflicting assumptions.
Delete the paragraph. The discussion of Hayek's work is a diversion
from the topic of the paper, and is mostly redundant since it just
restates what was said more succinctly in the first paragraph.
- But a single object cannot do much by itself.
+ A single object cannot do much by itself.
This is consistent with the above change.
- Instead, both objects and markets use abstraction
+ Instead, objects use abstraction
This is consistent with the above change.
- The problem Hayek was concerned with, how humans coordinate their plans
- with each other [...] figure out what to do at that time anyway.
Delete this half-paragraph. Again, it's a diversion, and pointing
out how Hayek's problem is different from the paper's true subject
only emphasizes the fact that it's a diversion.
- By contrast, when writing a program,
+ When writing a program,
This is consistent with the above change.
- By abstraction, we limit one object's need for knowledge of others,
- reducing the cases of relevance, aiding composition.
+ By abstraction, we limit one object's need for knowledge of others,
+ reducing the size of the case analysis, thereby aiding composition.
This wording is clearer.
2. Overview
============
- Why Not Shared State Concurrency.
+ Why Not Shared-State Concurrency.
"Shared state concurrency" should be hyphenated as "shared-state
concurrency" everywhere in this paper (because "shared-state" is
a compound adjective).
- JAVA
+ Java
Remove the small-caps formatting from all the names of programming
languages in this paper; it's jarring and anachronistic.
- Promise Pipelining introduces promises for the results of
- eventual-sent messages
+ Promise Pipelining introduces promises for the results of
+ eventually-sent messages
For grammar, and for consistency with "eventually-thrown", stick
to "eventually-sent" as the adjective for messages sent with the
"eventual send" operator.
- The When-Catch explains
- The When-Catch Statement explains
This is more consistent.
- From Object to Actors and Back Again. This section presents
+ From Objects to Actors and Back Again presents
This is more consistent.
- Discussion and Conclusions of current status,
+ Discussion and Conclusions summarizes current status,
This is more consistent.
-- ?!ng
More information about the e-lang
mailing list