Re: [Squeak-VMdev] re: version 4 changes

[<gor...@bl...>]

Avi Bryant <av...@be...> wrote:
[SNIP]
> The real question, I guess, is 
> whether transactional systems are considered an important enough set of 
> applications to use a whole header bit to optimize them.  Since I 
> mostly work on business applications, which usually need transactional 
> behavior, my bias is that they are important enough, but obviously not 
> everyone will think so.
> 
> Avi

It seems to me that a transactional engine like KATS for example could
be used in much more situations than merely business applications. It
doesn't even have to be persistent objects, but rather multi-Process
applications that use a transactional model instead of Montitors,
Queues, Semaphores etc.

regards, Göran