[erlang-questions] design pattern question for messaging

[Raoul Duke]

>>I keep coming back to wishing for an environment where the basic "unit
>>of computation" has both actor-like properties and object-like
>>properties.  Long term persistence, data encapsulation, plus
>>message-passing concurrency.

so everything comes with problems, so there's no perfect answer, but
the longer i use OO and stuff the more i think we're all just
brainwashed into using it when it is just plain bad. actors are maybe
less bad somehow (not that Erlang is actors per Hewitt et. al.) but
even if they are less bad than shared mutable state, i hardly think
they are the best. dataflow a la gpars or oz or fbp whatever might be
a step up, as might any number of other things like
functional-relational. (yes, Erlang exists and has been proven to work
yadda.) tho if i had to do things along these lines, i'd wish that
clusterken would be a viable product.