Processing-Mode Equality

[Maurice Naftalin]

Thanks for the suggestion. From my point of view, the problem with that is that it singles out parallel execution as something unusual that can be transparently substituted for the (presumably default) mode of sequential execution. I'm looking for something symmetric, because what I want to suggest is that there is no default execution mode – neither sequential nor parallel (and yes, I know the method names don't help with this).

Maurice

On 6 Feb 2014, at 12:52, Victor Nazarov wrote:

> transparent parallelism?
> 
> --
> Victor Nazarov
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Maurice Naftalin <maurice at morninglight.co.uk> wrote:
> In writing about streams, I want to explain how the API has been shaped by the design goal of maintaining functional equivalence between parallel and sequential execution. I'm looking for a name for that goal, but so far the best I've come up with is the Principle of Processing-Mode Equality, which is pretty clumsy. I'd appreciate suggestions for improving it (which I will be happy to attribute). Thanks in advance!
> 
> Maurice
> 
>