3 ms·
Same with the BEAM languages like Erlang, Elixir, and Gleam. Though it still bothers me that they call their green threads "processes".
by seabrookmx 5mo ago
Same with the BEAM languages like Erlang, Elixir, and Gleam. Though it still bothers me that they call their green threads "processes".
- chiffaa 5mo agoThat's mostly because BEAM uses an actor-style approach while predating the concept of actors, isn't it? Interesting artefact of history if so Edit: upon rechecking, apparently that's not exactly right, and Erlang designers learned of actors after designing the language, which makes it all the more interesting
- zokier 5mo agoActors predate both Erlang and BEAM by significant factor
- ihumanable 5mo agoI've spent the last decade in erlang / elixir / OTP. I think a lot of the naming comes from the early use of erlang as effectively an "OS" for telecom switches. I always joke that BEAM wants to be the operating system.
- xelxebar 5mo ago> I've spent the last decade in erlang / elixir / OTP. Do you have a blog? I would love a peek into your unique experience.
- Munksgaard 5mo agoThe terminology in Erlang predates green threads by a decade or so.
- klas_segeljakt 5mo agoThey are (lightweight) processes since they have no shared memory. Each process has its own stack and heap.
- seabrookmx 5mo agoI've never thought about it that way, but that makes sense!