Erlang killer app?,

isaac gouy <>
Sat Jul 20 21:47:14 CEST 2002

Ulf Wiger wrote:
>ideal for the flexible and robust messaging 
>backbones we wanted to build

Alex Peake wrote:
>warehouse application is old and the whole system 
>about to be re-written

Ulf, given the Erlang community has a depth of
experience outside of telecomm, perhaps the advantages
of Erlang aren't well known outside of the telecomm
community? They aren't well known by people building
systems which require similar qualities?

Alex, which bits do you imagine would really use
Erlangs strengths, which bits would need to be
implemented in something else? How did you hear about

>Erlang offers huge productivity gains
Hmm. I had a big surprise going from Smalltalk to
Java. We knew that Smalltalk was x10 more productive
than C++ but thought Smalltalk would only be x2 better
than Java. It's amazing how much static typing and an
excess of syntax slow you down ;-)

So-many Smalltalk systems have been re-written in
Java, at great cost and reduction of functionality. 

IMHO mostly it doesn't matter that Smalltalk is hugely
more productive, or that Erlang is hugely more
productive. It matters that they have name recognition
as the best solution for a particular class of

(And that's why I've been asking about the core
strengths of Erlang/OTP, and how they can be applied
outside of Telecomm)

best wishes, Isaac

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list