[erlang-questions] Why is Erlang what it is?
Thu Dec 14 12:21:07 CET 2006
On 12/14/06, Mats Cronqvist <> wrote:
> Kirill Zaborski wrote:
> > OK, so now meaningful reply from Erlang people.
> i assume you mean "no" instead of "now".
i'm a bit confused about what you might consider "meaningful". what i
> to express was that from ericsson's perspective, the cost of introducing
> (huge) is much higher than the perceived benefits (unclear).
> imo, the only thing that could change this is compelling evidence that
> would improve ericsson's products.
so there were no such evidence shown?
And I'm sorry about "no meaningful" it's a bit insulting, but Ulf have given
quite a good answer.
And about Prof. Wadler's work - I'll consult him directly
> erlang-questions mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions