> > > You have to put quite a bit of thought in to get things right. > > Which raises the question: *is* concurrency actually a strong selling > point for functional languages? > > Yes, but I would question the concept of "free". I would sell the concurrency features thusly:
1) Assert that functions should be pure 2) Assert that all data should be immutable Now, using that we can show how concurrency is easier (not free), to implement using existing OOP concepts. For instance: Var = [ThreadLocal] in C# (kindof) Atom = Interlocked.CompareExchange in .NET Agent = Queue with a processing thread Refs = um...yeah All of these concurrency "features" don't mean a thing if your data itself is mutable, or your functions impure. So it's not so much that thread safety is simple in FP, it's more that it's almost impossible in OOP. Timothy -- 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
