A Joeish Erlang distribution

Joakim G. <>
Fri Jan 31 10:49:04 CET 2003


True, true. But this needs to be discussed somewhere?! We may divide the
'erlang-questions' list into a 'devel' and 'user' list I suppose?

Probably not.

The things I propose here is meant make Erlang easier to use (not Erlang/OTP).

If you want a *Telecom* platform. Please, go ahead use OTP! It's solid and
does what it's suppose to do.

I'm just telling you what my "years of Erlang coding experience" has learnt
me. Be it politically correct or not. Telecom:ish or not. I don't care.

/Jocke

Vance Shipley wrote:
> You guys are confusing the people on this list who haven't had the
> benefit of years of Erlang coding experience.  It's hard to wrap
> your head around the difference between Erlang and OTP when what
> you're working with is the documentation for the Erlang/OTP
> distribution.
> 
> In my case I embraced Erlang because the OTP was built using it.
> I wasn't looking for a cool new language that I'd be the only one
> on my block who knew.(*)  I was looking to manage all the problems 
> that come with building a telecom system.  OTP may not be perfect
> but until you're ready to build a better one you should be using
> it.  
> 
> For all the folks still on the learning curve (most):
> 
> 	Follow the OTP design principles, and use the OTP
> 	tools.  You will stay out of trouble and build 
> 	systems which work well while concentrating on
> 	your application itself.
> 
>    -Vance
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 09:47:24AM +0100, Joakim G. wrote:
> }  
> }  I would avoid OTP at least for a middle sized software projects
> }  involving 5-35 programmers.
> }  
> }  Why? I would like to keep full transparency to the use of primitive
> }  Erlang constructs, e.g. (async/sync) message passing, receive
> }  statements, loop based servers, EXIT signal propagation etc.
> }  
> }  OTP's high level abstraction and callback oriented approach alienates
> }  the programmer from what actually is going on in the system. This is
> }  bad. It also extremely boring. If you want Xt programming why not go
> }  for that directly.
> 
> 
> (*) Erlang certainly is cool and using the language to code our 
>     applications has been both a joy and a boon to our productivity.
>     (...and I'm pretty sure I'm the only one on the block ...)


-- 
If you think the pen is mightier than the sword, the next time someone
pulls out a sword I'd like to see you get up there with your Bic.




More information about the erlang-questions mailing list