2011/12/25 Tom Murphy <amindfv@gmail.com>

   On the other hand:
   I'd _strongly_ argue against "making up our minds" about definitions within the Haskell community. Most of these concepts aren't Haskell-specific.

   An example of something to avoid is our definitions of "concurrency" and "parallellism." We as a community have specific, good definitions of each term. [1] So does the Erlang community. [2] Yet the definitions don't have anything to do with each other, which makes talking across communities more difficult.

amindfv / Tom

[0] http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Eager_evaluation

[1] http://learnyousomeerlang.com/the-hitchhikers-guide-to-concurrency#dont-panic, paragraph 4

[2] http://book.realworldhaskell.org/read/concurrent-and-multicore-programming.html, "Defining concurrency and parallelism"

I kindly beg to differ. To me concurrency and parallelism have global and cross-language definitions.
The links you gave don't only define "concurrency" and "parallelism" in absolute as they focus their definition around Erlang's and Haskell's models of concurrency/parallelism. Still the broad idea remains.

> I'd _strongly_ argue against "making up our minds" about definitions within the Haskell community. Most of these concepts aren't Haskell-specific.

My referencial was Haskell-centric. And we can go by steps: first come to a consensus within the Haskellers and then give broad definitions that concerne every language.