Conversation
Notices
-
@natecull If it has read-only access to the Internet, it's not a pure functional object. :-)
-
@natecull Yeah, you said it yourself, you would observe the side-effects. :-)
But of course, pure functional computation is in the end just a convenient lie, and we decide where we draw the line and the lie applies.
-
@scolobb @natecull Yes, that's the computer sciency term for useful lies. :)
-
@natecull @scolobb Yeah, Actors and CSP are more of a protocol than an abstraction, so there is less lying going on. But I don't know their academic shape and whether it accounts for e.g. lost messages and dead processes.
-
@clacke @natecull Technically, the term "actor model" [0] refers to a quite abstract model (some abstract actors sending around some abstract messages, and also creating new actors). In this sense, it is not less abstract than pure functional programming.
In general, defining whether something is more abstract than something else is quite difficult and usually requires setting up an abstract basis, which is, again, an abstraction.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor_model
-
@natecull @scolobb Garbage collection for Actors, especially for remote objects, is quite tricky.
/ping @cwebber
Hallå Kitteh
scolobb
All Chirp! content and data are available under the