Re: [Chicken-users] Distributed-concurrent computing: If Erlang is a 10. . .

[Lawrence Bottorff]

Yes, thanks for all the good info. Sorry I didn't realize termite is a part of chicken. Are there any tutorial/examples of termite chicken? i found what seems to be a very old paper: http://scheme2006.cs.uchicago.edu/09-germain.pdf

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Ivan Raikov <address@hidden> wrote:

Hello Lawrence,

   I can only speak from my experiences with Chicken and MPI: it was
very easy to call the MPI primitives using the Chicken FFI
functionality and write code for distributed point distance queries on
a cluster with up to 512 MPI processes. All communication was done
with vectors of 64-bit floating point numbers; I did occasionally miss
the ability to use complex datatypes, but I never attempted to use the
MPI datatype interface, which does not seem too difficult to work
with. MPI also does not really provide for fault tolerance, so there
Erlang might have the edge. So I would expect performance would be on
par with Erlang but perhaps you would have less flexibility and
options for error handling.

   -Ivan

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Lawrence Bottorff <address@hidden> wrote:
> . . . where might Chicken be concerning distributed-concurrent programming?
> How close to Erlang's perfect 10 can you get with Chicken. Of course if
> Chicken is even better than a 10, let me hear about it.
>
> LB
>

> _______________________________________________
> Chicken-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
>