Would you prefer I use the phrase "completely incorrect about the memory models of the majority of languages you named and the erroneous conclusions you reached from them?"
That is certainly more accurate, but seemed needlessly confrontational in my first draft, so I opted for the more generic phrase "confused post", which implied maybe the post itself was simply jumbled up and didn't clearly offer your intent to the audience. You did ask after all.
I was trying to give a non-confrontational way to explain why I almost downvoted your post for being very misleading, and opted instead to respond with a slightly more correct post.
HN needs less fighting and more knowledge.
I thought what you were trying to say was, "parallelism is not the same as concurrency" but that it got jumbled up. That is a correct statement.
That is certainly more accurate, but seemed needlessly confrontational in my first draft, so I opted for the more generic phrase "confused post", which implied maybe the post itself was simply jumbled up and didn't clearly offer your intent to the audience. You did ask after all.
I was trying to give a non-confrontational way to explain why I almost downvoted your post for being very misleading, and opted instead to respond with a slightly more correct post.
HN needs less fighting and more knowledge.
I thought what you were trying to say was, "parallelism is not the same as concurrency" but that it got jumbled up. That is a correct statement.