<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Jason Johnson wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:aa22f0200807062241t44fd9ce6veb50ba3bd6d3312f@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 7:09 AM, Michael van der Gulik <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mikevdg@gmail.com"><mikevdg@gmail.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">It's not *that* hard to write a large, scalable, concurrent systems using
Processes and Semaphores. Sure, at times it can be difficult with horrible
bugs that take a decade to manifest, but if you use consistent patterns and
encapsulate complex behaviour well, it is quite tractable.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
This is the second time I've seen you express this opinion. It is
irrelevant whether *you* think it's easy/tractable/etc. or not. The
empirical data is in: it's really really hard to do. And languages
like Erlang show it is entirely too complex for no real gain.
People were (and still are I'm sure) expressing this same thing with
manual memory management. "Oh, it's not that hard, these guys just
don't use the right technique/are lazy/etc" and it that's just not the
case. The fact is, with both MM and concurrency, both of these models
ruin composability. That's the point.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Hi,<br>
<br>
Let's drop the flawed analogy with manual memory management shall we.
It doesn't map very well at all as an example.<br>
<br>
Unless you're claiming some advancement in process concurrency that is
similar to garbage collection.<br>
<br>
So you're going after an Erlang model? Is that it?<br>
<br>
I've seen no cleaner solution presented by any of you. How is it
cleaner? Be specific please.<br>
<br>
All the best,<br>
<br>
Peter William Lount<br>
[ | peter at smalltalk dot org ] value.<br>
</body>
</html>