Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The ability of read/write to communicate via errors as well as the actual data transferred is significant - there's a reason Go's i/o model is io.Reader/io.Writer and not chan []byte.

You might as well explain channels in terms of any blocking operation if the bar for "isomorphic" (now backtracked to "intuitively" I guess) is that low.




I don't know what's the bar for "isomorphism", but I know that the word literally means "same shape", so just because some nerd that got killed in a duel over a girl used the same word in a mathematical context doesn't give him dibs over its general use.

Unless, of course, system calls can be modeled as operators over sets. In which case, please tell me how.


In normal use of the term, a function's shape is its type signature; at the very least its in and out arity, and usually even more specific.


Well, in my case I used it to signify same behavior in terms of process/goroutine communication. I think it's "specific enough" to warrant the use of word "isomorphic".




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: