Mon Jun 18 07:09:23 CEST 2007
Im new to Erlang - so its just that - a guess. But ... when I imagine
what the machinery for a message send is, compared to what I know the
machinery for a function call is, at last in broad strokes, if a fun
call isnt faster, it should be.
The speed is one thing - but I think the more important reason is that
the fun call subsumes the message receive, that is, the
generator-as-repeated-fun call can implement receive functionality
easily if desired, but it would tend to be awkward to do it the other
>> I guess calling a fun is much faster than sending messages between
> Well that'd certainly be a good reason. I don't know that I've seen the
> numbers. I have seen stuff that suggests calling a fun is a bunch slower
> than calling a defined module-member function.
> [ I love pre-moistened towelettes ] Mike McNally -- m5@REDACTED
> erlang-questions mailing list
More information about the erlang-questions