[erlang-questions] Why is Erlang what it is?

Serge Aleynikov <>
Thu Dec 14 22:54:44 CET 2006


Perhaps the most compelling experience would be by trying it by 
yourself.  Download the OCaml compiler from http://caml.inria.fr, try to 
write any small program, and get it compiled.  The first thing you find 
will be that the compiler will curse at you all the way until you 
finally manage to write the code free of type-related issues and get 
rewarded by obtaining an executable program that will likely provide 
correct results on the first run.

On a separate note, the presence of static typing would indeed make 
Erlang more efficient at run time.  However the benefits that we get in 
it using strict typing work quite well for what the Erlang language and 
run-time were designed for.

Serge

t ty wrote:
> On 12/14/06, Dominic Williams <> wrote:
> [snip]
> 
>> It seems to me this reasoning, although, valuable, does not refute the
>> argument that static typing might have /saved/ you a lot of testing effort.
> 
> Is there actual empirical data showing static typing actually saving
> testing effort ?
> 
> t
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> 
> http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> 




More information about the erlang-questions mailing list