|
|
|
|
|
by kcl
1468 days ago
|
|
The problem with concurrent computing is not a lack of Erlang awareness or message passing awareness. If either was the solution we wouldn't be having this discussion since they both pre-date the 90s. There ought to be a codeword where you can invoke the shortcomings of Erlang without getting dragged into a conversation with someone desperate to talk about Erlang. Next time I will rot13 it. |
|
-You- said "But the actor formulation is too awkward for all but Erlang-specific use-cases". I was simply commenting that it's not awkward at all, for all sorts of use cases that aren't Erlang specific. Perhaps you'd like to define your terms better if you want to avoid people saying "hey, that statement as it comes across is flawed". Maybe you meant Erlang isn't the right tool to generalize to all use cases - no one would disagree. Maybe you meant what it sounds like, it's too awkward to use except for certain degenerate cases, in which case I strongly disagree; it's quite easy, and switching back to running N isolated units of execution on < N threads, and sharing memory between them, feels like a chore. Or maybe you meant something else entirely.
Maybe if you don't want to "get dragged into" a conversation on something...don't mention it on a public forum with such a badly worded statement?