Language Bindings for Erlang

Taavi Talvik <>
Fri May 26 01:43:17 CEST 2006


On May 26, 2006, at 2:09 AM, Jeff Crane wrote:
> I dont understand how I'm not being understood. The
> question remains, how to best glue ANY LANGUAGE to
> erlang. Given the lack of choices in
> graphics/input/output handling this is probably what
> kills most people interest in the language. Gluing
> erlang to another language seems necessary for any
> learning project.

Most reasonable way is via port program. However, question
how to glue to language is probably wrong one.

Better to think how to glue to "some other tool most appropriate
for my problem". Talking about graphics - you can make
binding to OpenGL, Gtk, xlib, native implementation of X11
protocol, even make generic binding to C language. Erlang
binding for these already exist.

Which way is most useful is dependent on your problem set.

>> An observation: I don't understand why you want
>> "middleware". That
>> suggests you're either over- or under-specifying the
>> problem.
>
> Why is it hard to understand that there's no bindings
> for erlang? I dont understand why Erlang advocates so
> strongly insist on using erlang for everything. It
> seems LOGICAL to use another language for media and
> since C is all you have to bind to, it becomes
> middleware for whatever you already have or have
> talent for.

Not neccessarily - on graphics field look at Wings3d. Basicly
pure Erlang interfaces to OpenGL. Useful and interesting
stuff done in Erlang. C just happens to be there. For keeping
interest gs (tk binding) is probably enough.

The more universal tool is - the less useful it is. The more 
specialized tool
is - the less generic it is. There is no such thing as generic and 
useful
middleware.

Look at your problem set - maybe there are better tools than Erlang. 
Maybe
erlang is best tool.


best regards,
taavi




More information about the erlang-questions mailing list