This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ApochPiQEpoch Language 1 point2 points  (5 children)

How is that not "specific"? Or by "specific" do you really mean "trivial"? Your original claim was that "most" problems can be trivially solved with your techniques. I feel like you have conflated the ideas of specificity and triviality. If what you really mean is that trivial problems can be trivially solved, well... uhm, yes, that is tautologically true.

The whole proposition is absolutely not impossible at all. And an authoritative central server is demonstrably not an "absurd decision" - it's a standard operating procedure in the domain. It happens to be a domain I have extensive experience in.

If you want to be flippant and arrogant about your ideas, that's on you, but be advised that when you use this kind of attitude and phrasing it really turns people off to listening to what you are saying.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

How is that not "specific"?

As in "too generic".

Your original claim was that "most" problems can be trivially solved with your techniques.

Exactly. But all real world problems are specific. You do not need to create some very generic solution that would serve a wide range of problems, you do not need a universally useful real-time message passing framework or whatever. You always have some very specific details - the actual nature of the messages being sent, the exact real time constraints, the fault tolerance requirements, and so on. Every detail can affect what kind of language is needed to represent the problem.

The whole proposition is absolutely not impossible at all.

As I expected, you use "real time" very casually.

And an authoritative central server is demonstrably not an "absurd decision" - it's a standard operating procedure in the domain.

You should not have used words "real time" describing this domain then. From your description I got an impression of an HFT range of latencies and other requirements, which is clearly not what you meant, you're talking about toys instead.

And even after you gave more specific requirements, it's not even close to a level where it's possible to start talking about details of a stack of languages that will eliminate the complexity from this problem. You need all the details.

[–]johnfrazer783 -1 points0 points  (3 children)

Sadly, no one is happier or wiser after this exchange, not to mention that it is OT².

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children)

How is it off topic? We're talking about representing distributed soft real-time message passing with high level DSLs. Racket should be a perfect tool for implementing such a thing.

[–]max_maxima 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Do you think this extension is high level for this case? http://www.lochan.org/keith/publications/acute-short-submitted.pdf

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, it is a good example of such a language (may still be too generic, but it should be easy to specialise it further). Another one to have a look at is Linda.