In academia, in industry, and in the commercial world, there is a widespread belief that computing science as such has been all but completed and that, consequently, computing has matured from a theoretical topic for the scientists to a practical issue for the engineers, the managers, and the entrepreneurs. That is, mostly people who can […]
Edsger W. Dijkstra
Author Archives
The structure of “THE”-multiprogramming system
A multiprogramming system is described in which all activities are divided over a number of sequential processes. These sequential processes are placed at various hierarchical levels, in each of which one or more independent abstractions have been implemented. The hierarchical structure proved to be vital for the verification of the logical soundness of the design and the correctness of its implementation.
On-the-fly garbage collection: an exercise in cooperation
As an example of cooperation between sequential processes with very little mutual interference despite frequent manipulations of a large shared data space, a technique is developed which allows nearly all of the activity needed for garbage detection and collection to be performed by an additional processor operating concurrently with the processor devoted to the computation proper. Exclusion and synchronization constraints have been kept as weak as could be achieved; the severe complexities engendered by doing so are illustrated.
Guarded commands, nondeterminacy and formal derivation of programs
So-called “guarded commands” are introduced as a building block for alternative and repetitive constructs that allow nondeterministic program components for which at least the activity evoked, but possibly even the final state, is not necessarily uniquely determined by the initial state. For the formal derivation of programs expressed in terms of these constructs, a calculus will be be shown.
Self-stabilizing systems in spite of distributed control
The synchronization task between loosely coupled cyclic sequential processes (as can be distinguished in, for instance, operating systems) can be viewed as keeping the relation “the system is in a legitimate state” invariant. As a result, each individual process step that could possibly cause violation of that relation has to be preceded by a test deciding whether the process in question is allowed to proceed or has to be delayed. The resulting design is readily—and quite systematically—implemented if the different processes can be granted mutually exclusive access to a common store in which “the current system state” is recorded.
Shape the Future of Computing
ACM encourages its members to take a direct hand in shaping the future of the association. There are more ways than ever to get involved.
Get Involved