> Chances are you _are_ using a lot of those primitives in any given parallel or concurrent program, but you're only aware of one or two of them. Okay, but I t

> Chances are you _are_ using a lot of those primitives in any given parallel or concurrent program, but you're only aware of one or two of them. Okay, but I think it's fairly clear from context that "using" in my post meant "directly using" or "using in such a way that you have to understand how they work". There are a bunch of ways Erlang's message queues could work, but I don't need to know which way they work. If they work with locks you could say I'm using locks, but that's clearly not the point of what I'm saying. > And while concurrency and parallelism are not the same thing, you often end up having to consider the same synchronization problems in your code whether it's concurrent or parallel. Often, sure. But also, often not, which is why I said "it's quite possible that you've never written a line of parallel code."