Meyer, OO and concurrency

David Hopwood <>
Thu Jul 14 20:39:49 CEST 2005


todd wrote:
> Joe Armstrong (AL/EAB) wrote:
> 
>> What does "If better involves low latency then Erlang is not better."
>> mean?
>>
>> I can think of a lot of definitions of latency - in some an Erlang
>> implementation will be faster than a C implementation, in others it 
>> will be the other way around.
>>
> If you think latency is in the language then I am confused. It's a 
> property of the OS when using OS services.

No, it's a property of any software component when using the services
of that component. At the language level, the relevant questions are
"What obstacles does the language put in the way of writing components
with guaranteed low latency? Or with low expected latency?" Similar
questions also apply to language implementations.

-- 
David Hopwood <>




More information about the erlang-questions mailing list