[erlang-questions] Re: Classification of concurrency patterns

Robert Virding <>
Wed May 19 02:39:42 CEST 2010


On 18 May 2010 11:46, Joe Armstrong <> wrote:
> ...
>
> There's no point in expressing the concurrency in an algorithm if the
> hardware can't do it anyway
> (or perhaps there is?)

Yes, there is. If the algorithm is best expressed in a concurrent way
then you should definitely do so, even if the hardware can't do it.
You are saying what you mean. Or it can be a hint to the
implementation, for example using pmap instead of map means that you
feel that the arguments can be evaluated in parallel, it is then up to
the implementation/hardware to do it if possible.

Robert


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list