This whole subthread about asynchronous objects, and the actor model, made me think of "background" processing where objects have a running life of their own, a

This whole subthread about asynchronous objects, and the actor model, made me think of "background" processing where objects have a running life of their own, and it reminded me of a recent HN comment about almost the opposite approach, where nothing is allowed to be spawned off in the "background". The author contends that Go's "go" (and indeed async blocks in a number of languages) which launch new concurrent objects which the parent block doesn't have to wait for, are a form of badly structured programming. https://vorpus.org/blog/notes-on-structured-concurrency-or-go-statement-considered-harmful/ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21537706 The structured concurrency described there reminds me of "par" blocks in some languages (Occam, Handel-C, XMOS XC), where each statement inside the block runs in parallel and the whole block waits until all statements inside have completed. They do have asynchronous request/response patterns, but things can't be started and left to carry on running how they want, like you might think of bacteria.