Issue 6506: concurrent vs. parallel ExpansionRegions (uml2-superstructure-ftf)
Source: Daimler AG (Mr. Mario Jeckle, mario(at)jeckle.de)
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: The 3rd rev. draft of UML 2's superstructure document introduces the
keywords "parallel", "iterative", and "stream" for ExpansionRegions 
(p.
292).


But the example figures given at page 296 uses "concurrent" instead of
"parallel" without any introduction.


Finally, the metamodel type ExpansionKind (p. 248) solely defines
"parallel" and the other two keywords mentioned above. "concurrent" is
completely missing.


Sure, there is a distinction between concurrency (pseudo-parallel
execution of processes or threads on one single CPU) and parallelity
(parallel execution of processes or threads on multiple CPUs) but I'm
not convinced if we should introduce this distinction at the
specification level.


Any ideas?

Resolution: Duplicate with 6099.
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
November 7, 2003: received issue
December 2, 2004: closed issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====
-Return: cris.kobryn@telelogic.com 
Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 07:14:36 -0000 
From: "Cris Kobryn" <cris.kobryn@telelogic.com> 
To: juergen@omg.org, issues@omg.org, cris.kobryn@telelogic.com 
Subject: Fwd:  concurrent vs. parallel ExpansionRegions 
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster 
X-Originating-IP: 68.71.8.84 


--- In u2p-issues@yahoogroups.com, Mario Jeckle <mario@j...> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Hi group,


The 3rd rev. draft of UML 2's superstructure document introduces the
keywords "parallel", "iterative", and "stream" for ExpansionRegions 
(p.
292).


But the example figures given at page 296 uses "concurrent" instead of
"parallel" without any introduction.


Finally, the metamodel type ExpansionKind (p. 248) solely defines
"parallel" and the other two keywords mentioned above. "concurrent" is
completely missing.


Sure, there is a distinction between concurrency (pseudo-parallel
execution of processes or threads on one single CPU) and parallelity
(parallel execution of processes or threads on multiple CPUs) but I'm
not convinced if we should introduce this distinction at the
specification level.


Any ideas?


Mario


- --
Prof. Mario Jeckle
University of Applied Sciences Furtwangen
Dept. Business Applications of Computer Science


W3C Representative of DaimlerChrysler Research and Technology
OMG Representative of DaimlerChrysler


URL: http://www.jeckle.de
MailTo:mario@j...
MailTo:jeckle@f...


My public key: http://www.jeckle.de/marioJeckle.pub
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


iD8DBQE/CrYk46tt20EwGqwRAsFeAKDgixm0KzS8SRebhjRUbOvDmATygwCg+x7e
nwFIiS91+0quPOCpW0VmGJk=
=Pxx0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





Issue 6506: concurrent vs. parallel ExpansionRegions            Activities      Conrad B
http://www.omg.org/issues/issue6506.txt
yourdirectory/uml2-superstructure-ftf.open.html#Issue6506


Duplicate


Duplicate with 6099.

--- End forwarded message ---