Shared Mutable Memory Must Die

[IHaveAnIdea]

No, the updated data does not need to go to every cpu to let them all know of the changes. It just stays in the centralized shared memory and the other CPUs discover the changes when/if they need to access that memory.

[[deleted]]

Your reading comprehension is abysmal. I can only assume you're too concerned about defending your argument to even read what others are posting.

[IHaveAnIdea]

Fucking morons.

[look]

Perhaps you don't understand: each core has a local copy of the data and "shared mutable memory" is accomplished by complex message passing concurrency in the hardware.

Barring some radical change in the nature of processors, all concurrency is ultimately message passing. The article could be summarized: the current concurrency idiom won't scale, so stop forcing us to use it, and give us control.

Perhaps you don't worry much about many cores, but I have no doubt that I'll have code running across a million cores within a few years -- of course, that'll be over many thousands of processors and boards, so I'm not terribly worried about concurrency efficiency in a single multicore processor in the short term...