|
|
|
|
|
|
by pdimitar
2227 days ago
|
|
|
Mostly true, minus the fact that the mutable state's access is serialized / centralized due to the nature of Erlang's actors (lightweight threads; usually called fibers in other languages, and even that is not a good analogy since they are preemptive and not cooperative). So the semantics being similar is not strictly and 100% true. You can't do non-atomic volatile modification like you can in C/C++. |
|
|
Yes, exactly. No one was implying that Erlang's model is mimicking those particularly weird languages. The statement was much more narrow.