On 7 Nov 2006, at 15:34, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

> That was actually my purpose in making the suggestion ... to stimulate
> debate about concurrency in Ruby, the major differences between the
> current 1.8 and proposed 1.9/2.0 concurrency tools, the way other
> languages deal, successfully or unsuccessfully, with concurrency,  
> etc.,
> etc., etc. :)


I read this a while ago - I have a feeling the link came from this  
list so you might be aware of it already.

http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/2006/EECS-2006-1.html

Ashley