Re: [Chicken-users] Anyone up for porting Termite to Chicken?

[Ivan Raikov]

  Well, of course, it is "possible" to implement anything in a
Turing-equivalent language, but I am curious what features of Erlang
or Termite are difficult to implement with MPI primitives and
Scheme. For example, "process migration" in Scheme MPI could be simply
passing a continuation from one node to another -- something that
would take one line of code using the s11n and mpi eggs in Chicken. My
own needs for distributed programming turned out to be very simple. I
am not even using all the features in the current mpi egg, so I am
curious to see and hear about real-world applications that use some
seriously complicated distributed programming features.


  I would agree that the MPI library on its own is on a much lower
level than either Termite or Erlang, but I would argue that Scheme+MPI
is a different beast altogether. As for "that licensing thing" you
haven't even asked whether I might dual-license my code for the
purposes of your projects, but are instead acting like a petulant
five-year-old who threatens to take his toys and go home if everybody
doesn't do his bidding. I am obviously not interested in providing my
code to petulant five-year-olds, but I will certainly consider
dual-licensing to serious developers with interesting projects, if
that would lead to a more widespread use of Chicken.

    -Ivan

"Leonardo Valeri Manera" <address@hidden> writes:

> I'm sure its possble to implement most if not all, but, termite
> provides those parts of the erlang model which make the
> message-passing model interesting already, without needing to
> implement them manually.
>
> There's more to the erlang model than just using a good
> message-passing library - I'm talking of things like process migration
> ...
>
> Plus of course there's that licensing thing that means if I wanted to
> use MPI i would have to roll my own chicken binding to it :)
>
> Cheers,
> Leo