TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Channels are Actors

24 pointsby carlehewittalmost 7 years ago
I highly recommend Simon Fowler&#x27;s ECOOP 2017 lecture <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=lpbkIjjoMRk" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=lpbkIjjoMRk</a><p>However, channels are best understood as Actors with put and get messages so that aChannel.put[x] puts x in aChannel and aChannel.get[ ] gets from aChannel. A channel of type T has the following interface: Interface Channel&lt;T&gt; put[T] -&gt; Void, get[ ] -&gt; T<p>Actors can be categorically automatized, which means that up to a unique isomorphism, there is just one model that satisfies the axioms. In this way, Actors can be much more precisely defined in a general way than can be done using an extended lambda calculus as in Fowler&#x27;s lecture.<p>Furthermore, a common misunderstanding is that an an Actor must have a mailbox, message queue, or event queue. There would be an infinite regress if any of these were required because since everything is an Actor, each of these would itself need a mailbox, message queue, or event queue. Instead, an Actor (e.g. a ReadersWriters scheduler) performs internal queuing when required. See <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Inconsistency-Robustness-Studies-Logic-Hewitt&#x2F;dp&#x2F;1848901593" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Inconsistency-Robustness-Studies-Logi...</a><p>To get the latest, see my upcoming Code Mesh Keynote: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;plus.google.com&#x2F;+CarlHewitt-StandardIoT&#x2F;posts&#x2F;BXSZ7Y25b4p" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;plus.google.com&#x2F;+CarlHewitt-StandardIoT&#x2F;posts&#x2F;BXSZ7Y...</a>

5 comments

whalesaladalmost 7 years ago
A channel can behave like an actor but they are not the same thing. An actor is a living entity. A channel is a transit mechanism.<p>What is the purpose of this post? To argue the academic definition of channels and actors? To spark a discussion on their uses and benefits?
评论 #17682161 未加载
评论 #17682224 未加载
评论 #17682319 未加载
carlehewittalmost 7 years ago
PS. The interface for ReadersWriter is<p>Interface ReadersWriter read[QueryRequest] -&gt; QueryResponse, write[WriteRequest] -&gt; Void<p>A ReadersWriter scheduler for a database allows multiple read messages to be concurrently operating in the database but a write excludes all others.
jchassoulalmost 7 years ago
How this view on channels relate with information theory? can we think of them as an actor and its capacity a property of the physical modeling represented by that actor: floppy disk, cd, dvd, lan, wan, river, lake, ocean?
评论 #17707534 未加载
juancnalmost 7 years ago
I assume you&#x27;re referring to the Actor model actors not the constrained implementations in popular frameworks, am I right?
评论 #17707568 未加载
评论 #17683918 未加载
rhizomealmost 7 years ago
This appears to be a post about a mystery programming language.
评论 #17682637 未加载