Why is there no related work section in this paper? I'm not sure simply calling it 'The' dataflow model is very friendly either to all the other previous dataflow models for parallelism that have been developed over the last four decades or so. Why can this implementation be the definitive one so much that it doesn't even need a qualified name and why aren't any of the others even worth a mention?
Comments
Why is there no related work section in this paper? I'm not sure simply calling it 'The' dataflow model is very friendly either to all the other previous dataflow models for parallelism that have been developed over the last four decades or so. Why can this implementation be the definitive one so much that it doesn't even need a qualified name and why aren't any of the others even worth a mention?
IMHO the same thing happened with the "object" concept in the '90s.
The introduction is essentially the related works section.