That's mostly because BEAM uses an actor-style approach while predating the concept of actors, isn't it? Interesting artefact of history if so
replyEdit: upon rechecking, apparently that's not exactly right, and Erlang designers learned of actors after designing the language, which makes it all the more interesting
I've spent the last decade in erlang / elixir / OTP. I think a lot of the naming comes from the early use of erlang as effectively an "OS" for telecom switches.
replyI always joke that BEAM wants to be the operating system.
Actors predate both Erlang and BEAM by significant factor
reply