Paper Details

%T occam Obviously
%A Peter H. Welch
%E Peter H. Welch, Frederick R. M. Barnes, Kevin Chalmers, Jan Bækgaard Pedersen, Adam T. Sampson
%B Communicating Process Architectures 2012
%X This talk explains and tries to justify a range of questions
   for which its title is the answer. It reviews the history of
   occam: its underlying philosophy (Occam\[rs]s Razor), its
   semantic foundation on Hoare\[rs]s CSP, its principles of
   process oriented design and its development over
   almost three decades into occam\-pi (which blends in the
   concurrency dynamics of Milner\[rs]s pi\-calculus). Also
   presented will be its urgent need for rationalisation \-\-
   occam\-pi is an experiment that has demonstrated significant
   results, but now needs time to be spent on careful
   review and implementing the conclusions of that review.
   Finally, the future is considered. In particular, how do we
   avoid the following question being final: which language had
   the most theoretically sound semantics, the most efficiently
   engineered implementation, the simplest and most pragmatic
   concurrency model for building complex systems ... and
   was mostly forgotten (even as its ideas are slowly and
   expensively and painfully being reinvented piece\-by\-piece,
   as they must be)?

If you have any comments on this database, including inaccuracies, requests to remove or add information, or suggestions for improvement, the WoTUG web team are happy to hear of them. We will do our best to resolve problems to everyone's satisfaction.

Copyright for the papers presented in this database normally resides with the authors; please contact them directly for more information. Addresses are normally presented in the full paper.