> - You believe the actor-model concurrency is a better idea.
Better than using stateful concurrency? If you have read "Concepts, Techniques, and Models of Computer Programming" you would see that each approach is not necessarily "better", they each have their own unique advantages and disadvantages
To quote from CTM:
The message-passing approach is often the
best for multi-agent programs, i.e., programs that consist of autonomous entities
(“agents”) that communicate with each other. The shared-state approach is often
the best for data-centered programs, i.e., programs that consist of a large repository
of data (“database”) that is accessed and updated concurrently. Both approaches
can be used together for different parts of the same application.
My name is Sam Sudore, I am a seasoned technical professional with over 20 years of management and business experience. I live in Seattle and conduct a lot of business in San Francisco. I represent a small but talented group of Ruby and Java developers based right at the boarder of Mexico. We have helped a lot of companies achieve their goals while keeping their expenses in check. If you are interested we would love the opportunity to discuss your development needs to see if we may be of service. Give me a call anytime if you would like to discuss this further.
Better than using stateful concurrency? If you have read "Concepts, Techniques, and Models of Computer Programming" you would see that each approach is not necessarily "better", they each have their own unique advantages and disadvantages
To quote from CTM: The message-passing approach is often the best for multi-agent programs, i.e., programs that consist of autonomous entities (“agents”) that communicate with each other. The shared-state approach is often the best for data-centered programs, i.e., programs that consist of a large repository of data (“database”) that is accessed and updated concurrently. Both approaches can be used together for different parts of the same application.