Talk:Actor model implementation

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Science This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

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.

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.)

What is the relevance of the FORTH to the actor model?

There is link but no explanation.

Could it be misplaced here instead of Actor (programming language)? 128.101.221.166 (talk) 07:21, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of curiousity, would Erlang be considered an actual implementation of the Actor model? If not, why not? 124.107.146.20 (talk) 05:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And if not, what would be? It's hard to believe there isn't any widely used language that implements this crucial concept.--88.73.34.231 (talk) 14:45, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"When Request[Bind[identifier value] customer] is received by an Actor Environment, a new environment Actor is created such that When the new environment Actor receives Request[Lookup[identifier’] customer’] then if identifier is the same as identifier’ send customer’ Returned[value], else etc pp" Please set the code apart somehow. My eyes hurt and my brain goes on strike. Maybe make those nested when-if-then-elses clearer by indentation? --87.162.29.17 (talk) 00:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]