4 ms·
This is why I'm talking about specific model with static handlers per actor, where you can't choose handlers dynamically depending on the state you are in. Whet
by zzzcpan 8y ago
This is why I'm talking about specific model with static handlers per actor, where you can't choose handlers dynamically depending on the state you are in. Whether you are on state S1 or S2, all handlers are still able to receive messages, what they can't do is run at the same time.
- gpderetta 8y agoIt can receive all messages you want, but if the only message that it that would cause a state transition, and send out a message, is M, then it is still stuck. I mean, I'm no expert, but I guess you could statically analize the state machine and figure out, given a set of communicating actors, which sequence of messages would lead to a global state from which there is no progress. I assume that, because message ordering is not deterministic the analysis is probably non easy to do.
- zzzcpan 8y agoWell, this is the limit all models have. You can abuse memory safety the same way and use indices of bounds checkable arrays as raw pointers for example.