> far as i know..actors share a mutable queue.. so there's good possibility
> for dead-locks

Actors as they work in erlang don't have mutable state (not
intrinsically anyway, though of course you can implement an actor that
does poke on shared data since it's your code). The 'state' in an
erlang actor is that of parameter(s) to an infinitely tail-recursive
function.

Deadlock in a message passing system is still possible if you limit
the mailbox size (unless some other means are used to prevent it). My
understanding is that mailbox size is not limited in erlang, and that
there is no other means to avoid deadlock, meaning that while you will
not deadlock in the message passing system you can cause memory
exhaustion.

Disclaimer: While I've played with erlang I'm not really that into it,
please correct me someone if I've misrepresented anything.

-- 
/ Peter Schuller

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en

Reply via email to