Relations Between The Expressiveness of Different Forms of Future
Eager thread-specific futures can be straightforwardly implemented in terms of non-thread-specific futures, by creating a thread to calculate the value at the same time as creating the future. In this case it is desirable to return a read-only view to the client, so that only the newly created thread is able to resolve this future.
To implement implicit lazy thread-specific futures (as provided by Alice ML, for example) in terms in non-thread-specific futures, needs a mechanism to determine when the future's value is first needed (for example, the WaitNeeded construct in Oz). If all values are objects, then the ability to implement transparent forwarding objects is sufficient, since the first message sent to the forwarder indicates that the future's value is needed.
Non-thread-specific futures can be implemented in terms of thread-specific futures, assuming that the system supports message passing, by having the resolving thread send a message to the future's own thread. However, this could be argued to be unnecessary complexity: in programming languages based on threads, the most expressive approach appears to be to provide a combination of non-thread-specific futures, read-only views, and either a 'WaitNeeded' construct or support for transparent forwarding.
Read more about this topic: Futures And Promises
Famous quotes containing the words relations, forms and/or future:
“Major [William] McKinley visited me. He is on a stumping tour.... I criticized the bloody-shirt course of the canvass. It seems to me to be bad “politics,” and of no use.... It is a stale issue. An increasing number of people are interested in good relations with the South.... Two ways are open to succeed in the South: 1. A division of the white voters. 2. Education of the ignorant. Bloody-shirt utterances prevent division.”
—Rutherford Birchard Hayes (1822–1893)
“The Dada object reflected an ironic posture before the consecrated forms of art. The surrealist object differs significantly in this respect. It stands for a mysterious relationship with the outer world established by man’s sensibility in a way that involves concrete forms in projecting the artist’s inner model.”
—J.H. Matthews. “Object Lessons,” The Imagery of Surrealism, Syracuse University Press (1977)
“For me chemistry represented an indefinite cloud of future potentialities which enveloped my life to come in black volutes torn by fiery flashes, like those which had hidden Mount Sinai. Like Moses, from that cloud I expected my law, the principle of order in me, around me, and in the world.... I would watch the buds swell in spring, the mica glint in the granite, my own hands, and I would say to myself: “I will understand this, too, I will understand everything.””
—Primo Levi (1919–1987)