I need to understand the fairness  and nondeterministic nature of the select  (really?) with the deterministic properties of XC code (also ).
In  I wrote:
There also is this quote in the Ordering [[ordered]] chapter of :XMOS states, while describing an example (page 23 of ) that: “If both inputs become ready at the same time, only one is selected, the other remaining ready on the next iteration of the loop.”
Page 47 of  states it differently: “If more than one of these inputs or transactions is ready then the choice of which is executed is made nondeterministically.”
The first quote takes “the other” and “next iteration” into account. This is interesting, if there is a concern of “fairness” in it. ..
The XMOS XCore processors have “deterministic thread execution”, as they write in the introducery texts about them. Or “up to 8 concurrent, deterministic real-time tasks”.
Nondeterministic elements in the language and deterministic execution by the processor. ..
Is "unspecified" in this as it says or is it nondeterministic == fair? As in the occam, PRI ALT an [[ordered]] select would be a way to let the programmer build his own interpretation of fairness.Generally there is no priority on the events in a select. If more than one event is ready when the select executes, the chosen event is unspecified.
There also of coure is the case of good and bad nondeterminsm. From :
Could anybody help me getting (some of) this straigth? (That would include saying against the quotes of my own writing etc.) I am hoping to tell about it with somewhat more certainty in an invited lecture at the real-time course at NTNU (in Trondheim) next week..I did get a letter from a computer scientist and author the other day, stating this:
“I tend to say the functional correctness of a program should not depend on the choice made where there is a non-deterministic choice – but the temporal correctness of a program may.”
“..if you could show that any choice leads to temporal correctness then that would be fine. I tend to stress that determinism is not necessary – what we need is predictability.
Of course one way to get predictability is to be deterministic, but this is not the only way”
- - -
 Nondeterminsm chapter "XC by XMOS". This chapter is quite complex, and I am not certain if I got all of it right..
 XC code examples chapter "XC server with state-based timing serving two clients". This code certainly behaves fair where a server handles clients equally "often", with no magic code to ensure it. It's just another example of the very elegant XC
 XMOS Programming Guide (as of 17Jan2018: 2015/9/21 version F, 2015/9/18 in the document), see https://www.xmos.com/published/xmos-programming-guide
- - -
 is in : https://www.xmos.com/download/public/XC ... 1009A).pdf
 is in : https://www.xmos.com/download/public/XC ... [Y-M]).pdf