home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.transputer
- Path: sparky!uunet!inmos!titan.inmos.co.uk!news
- From: steved@phoenix.inmos.co.uk (Stephen Doyle)
- Subject: Re: OCCAM/C various
- Message-ID: <1992Nov19.170158.25482@titan.inmos.co.uk>
- Sender: news@titan.inmos.co.uk
- Reply-To: steved@inmos.co.uk (Stephen Doyle)
- Organization: INMOS Limited, Bristol, UK.
- References: <rob.721665532@dutncp8> <MICHAEL.92Nov16185558@lucrece.uk.ac.oxford> <2292@eagle.ukc.ac.uk> <rob.722034771@dutncp8> <1992Nov18.130407.12799@titan.inmos.co.uk> <rob.722124411@dutncp8>
- Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 17:01:58 GMT
- Lines: 34
-
- In article <rob.722124411@dutncp8> rob@pact.nl (Rob Kurver) writes:
- >In <1992Nov18.130407.12799@titan.inmos.co.uk> steved@lion.inmos.co.uk (Stephen Doyle) writes:
- >
- >... Although customer
- >feedback indicates people eventually forget about Occam as they find
- >they can do everything they want in PACT Parallel C.
- >
- You are rather trivialising OCCAM to syntax for creating/using processes and
- channels, there is much more than this to the language, a C environment
- simply does not provide the semantics, compile and run-time checking,
- formal proving or transformation methods that you get with OCCAM. OCCAM is
- a popular language and is not losing popularity, you can rewrite an
- application in obfuscated C but it bears only a passing resemblance to
- OCCAM. I still echo the sentiment of many customers who like to use the
- benefits of both.
-
- >I've seen benchmark results of the beta version of your new optimizing C
- >compiler, ...
-
- Aren't benchmarks wonderful, so subjective!
-
- Just as well there are so many other goodies in the package then!
-
- > ... email me for details
-
- Likewise
-
- Steve
-
-
- Steve Doyle, Software Marketing, INMOS Ltd | Tel +44 454 616616
- 1000 Aztec West |
- Almondsbury | UK: steved@inmos.co.uk
- Bristol BS12 4SQ, UK | US: steved@inmos.com
-