Yes, I understand that you are clarifying. I find that level of reasoning pedantic, and those who argue that point as if software can't possibly work correctly without it are ignoring their editor as they type.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
I don't have to worry about var state = State...() being raced in an actor because actors by definition prevent that.
In Scala (well, Akka), actors don't really offer you much protection, actually. They just give you a model which helps manage mutable state by conventions rather than compiler guarantees. Again, not so convincing.
-
-
If I know because of the programming model that some object cannot possibly be entered by multiple threads simultaneously, that's a guarantee. If someone breaks the model then the model can't guarantee.
-
I would say it's different degrees of "cannot possibly". In Haskell, you cannot possibly mutate state because the language simply doesn't support it. In Scala it's because you've been careful to define things that way.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.