Channels are Actors

Re:Channels are Actors by juancn on Friday August 03, 2018 @04:39PM (#17683428)

I assume you're referring to the Actor model actors not the constrained implementations in popular frameworks, am I right?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Channels are Actors by carlehewitt on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @11:36AM (#17707568)

In almost all current frameworks. every Actor has a mailbox. It makes very good sense for an Actor programming language not to have mailboxes built into every Actor because it can make programs less robust, more difficult to understand, and more difficult to optimize. Instead, when desired an Actor can do its own internal queuing as necessary.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Channels are Actors by carlehewitt on Friday August 03, 2018 @05:49PM (#17683918)

Correct.

Current implementations are inadequate :-(

There is a Silicon Valley startup working on one that should be adequate :-)

[ Parent | on HN ]