[erlang-questions] Application granularity (was: Parallel Shootout & a style question)

[Jay Nelson]

> One thread I found about parallel LC was this:
> http://www.erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2006-October/ 
> 023441.html
>
> Where you, Jay, suggested explicitly parallel LCs.

I did suggest it and after a discussion involving Kostis
and some of the language implementers, I realized it
was counter to the philosophy of erlang: code is sequential,
processes are explicit.  It makes the implementation of the
language far easier to manage and the results far more predictable
for a programmer.  (Or more bluntly, I was disabused of the idea.)

Although, this was 2 years ago and as I said, I have been
contemplating related topics for a while and have come
to the conclusion that granularity of application is more
important than worrying about slow spots in the code.

I have also suggested receive channels and have
since abandoned that suggestion as well, so I am not immune
to bad ideas which on reflection must be withdrawn.
Which, by the way, I've concluded as ROK pointed out
are muted by the introduction of more processes.

jay