Sun Oct 17 17:52:57 CEST 2010
On Oct 17, 6:30 am, Morten Krogh <> wrote:
> Actually shared memory is a bad wording. It should be called "C like
> pointer access to the data".
That sounds even worse! Have we learned nothing from all that history
of thread-aches in mainstream computing?
> The only real question is whether erlang should have a way for
> one process to read state of another...
I'm not sure you have fully thought through the implications of that
suggestion! ;) More concretely, consider the meaning of the java
keyword "volatile", what issue it points us to, and how that issue has
deep implications for the entire Java platform.
More information about the erlang-questions