Alexy Khrabrov skrev:
> Well, it's fun to join the old discussion in the new times.  The fact 
> that computers go multicore at a greater scale makes it recurrent.
> 
> Erlang makes concurrency easy due to purity, and OCaml is famous
 > for being eclectic. Why not embrace Erlang's model by imposing
 > limitations on what can be in threads -- keeping them pure?

Erlang processes are not pure, but they do have their own
memory heap, making it possible to do stop-and-copy GC per
process. I think the share-nothing model is more important
than purity.

There are some functions that allow Erlang processes to update
"global state" (e.g. the ETS hash and ordered_set tables), but
they are ensured to be atomic by the runtime system. You could
model each of these functions using normal erlang processes.

BR,
Ulf W