<div dir="ltr"><div>And of course OSes which embody a lot of the ideas we were after, but in such a way that they were/are way to heavy for what we were after. In many ways an Erlang system does have an OS feeling about it. At least I think so.<br>
<br></div>Robert<br><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 23 June 2014 02:27, Robert Virding <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rvirding@gmail.com" target="_blank">rvirding@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div>We had never heard of the actor model, at least I hadn't. We had other inputs, amongst others Eripascal which an internal Ericsson version of Pascal which had processes and messages.<br>
<br></div>
Hewitt got a lot of things wrong in his description of Erlang.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br><br></font></span></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">Robert<br><br></font></span></div><div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 22 June 2014 23:58, Peer Stritzinger <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:peerst@gmail.com" target="_blank">peerst@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 2014-06-22 02:07:12 +0000, Miles Fidelman said:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I see Erlang as an implementation of the Actor model, a la Carl Hewitt -<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
This crops up again and again but still isn't true.<br>
<br>
Erlang does *not* implement Actors but processes with links/monitors mailboxes and messages, which are not equivalent to actors.<br>
<br>
Processes: sequence of function calls interspresed with (selective) receives that pick out someting out of the mailbox.<br>
<br>
Actor: has to handle every message immediately, the actions a message triggers are happening concurrently, nothing longer running or sequential allowed.<br>
<br>
Hewitt says himself that Erlang does not implement Actors: <a href="http://arxiv.org/pdf/1008.1459.pdf" target="_blank">http://arxiv.org/pdf/1008.<u></u>1459.pdf</a><br>
<br>
He picks on different things like "silent process failure" instead of exceptions (which don't make much sense for somone familiar with Erlang) and that Actors seem to be garbage collected if they are "unneded" probably no longer referenced from the outside and Erlang needs "internal termination".<br>
<br>
Hewitt writes mostly what he finds lacking but on the other hand I find the process with mailbox, selective receive and links/monitors (not ver silent ;-) more powerful that simple Actors.<br>
<br>
Also as aside from what I've heard Erlangs creators didn't look at Actors when creating.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
-- Peer<br>
<br>
<br>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
erlang-questions mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:erlang-questions@erlang.org" target="_blank">erlang-questions@erlang.org</a><br>
<a href="http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions" target="_blank">http://erlang.org/mailman/<u></u>listinfo/erlang-questions</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>