3 ms·

> BTW, Erlang does not implement CSP fully. Specific evidence? > Its' interprocess communication is TCP based in general case No, it is not. Only between mac

by pmarreck 10mo ago

> BTW, Erlang does not implement CSP fully. Specific evidence? > Its' interprocess communication is TCP based in general case No, it is not. Only between machines is that true. > and because of this is faulty. LOL, no. Why are you rolling with "speaking a whole lot of BS based on ignorance" today? On the other hand, I now understand that one impediment to Elixir adoption is apparently "people repeating a lot of bullshit misinformation about it"

thesz 10mo ago
>> Its' interprocess communication is TCP based in general case > No, it is not. Only between machines is that true. It is true for communication between two VMs on same machine, isn't it? The general case includes same-VM processes, different VM processes and also different VMs on different machines. > Why are you rolling with "speaking a whole lot of BS based on ignorance" today? TCP is unreliable: https://networkengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/55581/acknowledgment-by-tcp-does-not-guarantee-that-the-data-has-been-delivered https://networkengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/55581... That was acknowledged by Erlang's developers before 2012. I remember that ICFP 2012 presentation about Cloud Haskell mentioned that "Erlang 2.0" apparently acknowledged TCP unreliability and tried to work around.
thesz 10mo ago
Here, page 31 on: https://wiki.haskell.org/wikiupload/4/46/Hiw2012-duncan-coutts.pdf https://wiki.haskell.org/wikiupload/4/46/Hiw2012-duncan-cout... Erlang circa 2012 was even less reliable than TCP on which its interprocess communication was based. Namely, TCP allows for any prefix of messages m1,m2,m3... to be received. But Erlang circa 2012 allowed for m1,m3... received, dropping m2. It may be not case today, but it was case about ten years ago.