[plt-scheme] Re: Thinking in FP vs OOP for large scale apps

From: Bill Wood (william.wood3 at comcast.net)
Date: Thu May 17 00:12:50 EDT 2007

On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 22:26 -0400, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
   . . .
> default, would fall out of sync.  In these (and similar dataflow)
> languages, the language is responsible for keeping the values in sync
> in some semantically-sensible way, making it unobjectionable for the
> language to permit state.  Indeed, one could say that in Flapjax and
> FrTime, *all* programs are *always* imperative.

This confuses me a little bit.  When I hear "dataflow" I think Val,
Lucid and perhaps Esterel.  Isn't the dataflow (and tokenflow) model
pretty deeply functional?  I remember reading a paper or two, from the
mid nineties perhaps, where the authors were pretty excited about being
able to set up shared memory as an efficiency hack for dataflow
computations.  They had to work hard to make it work.

 -- Bill Wood

Posted on the users mailing list.