[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Distributed-concurrent computing: If Erlang is a 10.
Re: [Chicken-users] Distributed-concurrent computing: If Erlang is a 10. . .
Fri, 8 Jan 2016 10:17:00 -0800
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.
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.
> Chicken-users mailing list