Talk:Actor model implementation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is a stub for an article that is about to be written as per suggestion in the discussion page of Actor model. In the meantime please feel free to begin.

[edit] Why this article exists now

This article exists because Actor model was being vandalized by the insertion of specialized discussion that properly belongs in this article.--Carl Hewitt 20:38, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Scheme?

Ableman and Sussman attempting to implement the Actor model as Scheme, especially w/r/t the meta-circular eval, doesn't even get an honorable mention here?

The problem with Scheme, it seems to me, is that it acts more like "one big Actor" rather than communications between actors; the functions -- named or anonymous -- are just messages. 71.246.25.169 10:57, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Scheme seems to avoid the problem of Namespace as defined by Hans Reiser. I believe Actors are defined by their namespaces, or in FORTH parlance, by their word dictionaries (ala metacompilers). (FORTH also assumes an eval, with the : syntax convention.)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/c/t/Talk%7EActor_model_implementation_f7ae.html"