Language Bindings for Erlang Again (Opinion)

Andrew Lentvorski <>
Thu Jun 8 04:58:16 CEST 2006


Gerd Flaig wrote:
> as often as I hear that argument, I still don't understand it. Anyone
> you would want to hire for software development can pick up Erlang in
> a few days and OTP in four to eight weeks.

I disagree.

The complete rearrangement to functional programming and message passing 
  does not come easily for 99% of software developers.  Now, we can 
argue whether you should hire people like that, but if you ignore 99% of 
all developers, your language is unlikely to become very widespread.

OTP cannot be picked up in 4 to 8 weeks because its documentation sucks.

Why do I use OTP?  When do I use OTP?  When do I *not* use OTP?

A reference manual like we currently have is merely a first step. 
Something on the list like "Guru of the Week" was for C++ would be 
useful and wouldn't require the publication of a book.

>> I'd like to see some good books on "modern erlang/otp"
>> for example. 
> 
> Yes, something like Practical Common Lisp, only for Erlang.

Ayup.  That would be nice.

-a



More information about the erlang-questions mailing list