[erlang-questions] What is the point of Spawn(Node, Fun) if Node has to have the same module loadable as a client node?

[Josh Adams]

>
> "All you have to do" (TM) is make sure all nodes have the same
> code before sending funs around. This is not easy in the general case,
> since all the code the fun calls also needs to be copied, and all the
> code it calls and so on. If the code is in more than two versions or
> changing in different places in the system at the same time this sould
> be very tricky.


I have been waiting for a chance to interject something into exactly this
sort of discussion by Really Smart People.

Unison is a language.  Here's its 'about' page:
http://unisonweb.org/2015-05-07/about.html#post-start .  Search for
"distributed systems" to get to the meatiest/most-fun bit of the intro.
Here's a brief and incomplete/wrong summary:

- It's a typed language.
- It has distribution primitives.
- It has a semantic editor - programs don't require lexing/parsing from
unicode.
- It covers the fundamental things Joe mentions in this article on IPFS:
http://joearms.github.io/2015/03/12/The_web_of_names.html
- Here's a nice deeper-dive into its API for distributed evaluation /
distributed systems:
http://unisonweb.org/2015-06-02/distributed-evaluation.html

I desperately want to hear the super smart people on this Mailing List tell
me (why it's dumb | zomg that's so neat! | we tried this in 2003 with
BitDonkey2000 and it didn't work fundamentally because X | more nuanced
responses).  Has anyone seen this before and/or on seeing it now does any
of it strike you as interesting?

(also, and related: geez I wish I 'got' session types)

-Josh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20160907/3f9e882d/attachment.htm>