>Actors themselves, however, are sequential. That is, each actor will only execute one behaviour at a time. This means all the code in an actor can be written without caring about concurrency: no need for locks or semaphores or anything like that.
I mean, sure, it's nice not to have to build this behavior in Java, but it can (and I and many other have) be built in Java, and then there's still Java's massive code base available. I have yet to do it in Rust, but Rust probably has great support for just this.
But let's not pretend that this solves all problems related to "concurrency", such as race conditions. In fact it specifically only solves problems where the individual state of an actor is completely independent of any other actor. Sure, that's a lot of places if done right, but in those places, a queue driven FSM in Java does the job.
It does solve all the problems related to concurrency, because there is no blocking IO. Blocking is forbidden. Pony guarantees freedom of race conditions and dead locks.
I mean, sure, it's nice not to have to build this behavior in Java, but it can (and I and many other have) be built in Java, and then there's still Java's massive code base available. I have yet to do it in Rust, but Rust probably has great support for just this.
But let's not pretend that this solves all problems related to "concurrency", such as race conditions. In fact it specifically only solves problems where the individual state of an actor is completely independent of any other actor. Sure, that's a lot of places if done right, but in those places, a queue driven FSM in Java does the job.