Dynamic languages are the future

[Joel Reymont]

On Aug 30, 2006, at 6:40 AM, Nick Linker wrote:

> I wonder why Erlang is not Lisp? I mean why inventors of Erlang  
> chose to create its own language instead of creating just ERTS- 
> specific library for LISP (or at least Scheme)?
>
> Parentheses? :-)

You don't have the process abstraction built into the language so  
Erlang cannot be recreated as Lisp, IMO. People are trying to do  
Erlang-like libraries for Lisp (MU-PROC) but they are still based on  
top of system threads which eliminates all the advantages, IMO.

--
http://wagerlabs.com/