0cachecoherency

5 ms·

1.
by 0cachecoherency 9y ago
Hi, I'm Sylvan Clebsch, the designer of Pony. I'm very much involved in Pony, as are most of the Causality founders in various ways. It's unfortunate that this kind of misinformation keeps being passed around.
2.
by 0cachecoherency 11y ago
Similarly, Pony's union (ie sum) type implementation always optimises to untagged, but required "boxing" raw machine-words when they're in a union type.
3.
by 0cachecoherency 11y ago
That anti-pattern isn't possible in Pony, because Pony has no blocking receive call.
4.
by 0cachecoherency 11y ago
Pony prevents you from writing that code. All communication between actors is by message passing, and there are no global variables. Check out reference capabilities.
5.
by 0cachecoherency 11y ago
Sandstorm looks extremely interesting. Very very extremely. If Pony could be useful at all to Sandstorm, please get in touch! Sorry for the docs misunderstanding - I promise, bad docs not withstanding, we are using "capability" to
6.
by 0cachecoherency 11y ago
I think you're right, the documentation should DEFINITELY be corrected! No worries on a false alarm, as I am always eager to discuss capabilities security, in any form :)
7.
by 0cachecoherency 11y ago
The "type qualifiers" you refer to are an extension of the capabilities-secure nature of Pony. They are themselves also a form of capabilities, specifically because the underlying language is itself capabilities-secure. You may be
8.
by 0cachecoherency 11y ago
That's great news that you know Mark! We have talked extensively with Mark about the design of Pony, and he agrees that it is indeed a capabilities type system, and that it is capabilities secure.
9.
by 0cachecoherency 11y ago
Data races are a subset of all race conditions. We don't claim that it's impossible to wait on a network message that never arrives, of course! However, Pony makes a messaging order guarantee that's much stronger than is typi
10.
by 0cachecoherency 11y ago
1. Because Pony is both type and exception safe, actors (the Pony equivalent of an Erlang process) don't fail in the catastrophic sense. Right now, if an actor wants to report that it can't go on to some other actor, it just sends
11.
by 0cachecoherency 11y ago
If you're interested in the object GC portion, there's this: http://ponylang.org/papers/OGC.pdf The Pony object garbage collector is fully concurrent, the reachable memory for any actor is GC'd totally i
12.
by 0cachecoherency 11y ago
Sorry about that, we'll get more docs up as soon as we can. For now, check out some of the included packages, like net/ssl. That calls C extensively (libressl, or openssl if you like). Or regex, which uses PCRE2.
13.
by 0cachecoherency 11y ago
There's a difference between GC'ing the memory reachable from an actor and GC'ing the actors themselves. Erlang requires a "poison pill" message to kill actors. The research paper is here: http://ponylang