Thank you. All feedbacks are very welcome.

I respect the Erlang/OTP model a lot. This library is inspired by that. I don't have the illusion to get anywhere close to it in a reasonable amount of time.

There are also differences to the Erlang/OTP too. This library uses typed messages and taking advantage of the compiler to do type checking. I found it is easier to create this library if 1) the number of input and output channels are fixed 2) the topology of who sends to whom is fixed when the tasks are passed to the scheduler.

Thank you for the feedback. This helps me a lot in deciding which area of this library needs more explanations. In a followup post I'll show 1) how to create actors run-time, 2) send and receive messages 3) respond to messages. 4) that the messages are async

The author here. Thank you for the feedback. I take it as my failure explaining what this library is about. I will write a followup post to explain why I think this library supports an actor-like programming model.

What your link shows is the usage of the channels. My post was about how to actually implement a similar thing.

I am waiting for that too. Especially Rust + OTP would be a big thing for me.

I don't think it is an issue either. In fact I was pretty happy when I understood the concept.

Unfortunately I haven't got experience with generics in languages other than C++, so thanks for pointing this out.