Never trust a statistics you didn't forge yourself
Marc van Woerkom
Thu Feb 23 11:41:23 CET 2006
>>As an example that bad rankings don't cause any stirr
>>e.g. the big language shootout, which is discussed on
>And the reason for this could be, that they do not
>comment on the results at
The (fictitious) analogon of the bit that offended me
would be something like:
"Consider the good results for Erlang with a grain of
salt, because an influential member of the Erlang mailing
asked everyone to improve the benchmarks"
.. and that had not happened sofar.
I want to stress that I like to see Erlang in your paper,
but with real numbers, be they bad or good, otherwise what
is such a survey good for? I certainly don't want to force
It is not that this stuff is in desperate need of
publicity. As a rough estimation of publicity I just
searched the ACM Digital Library.
Of 171,143 indexed items, we get following hits:
That's not bad.
More information about the erlang-questions