[erlang-questions] Erlang vs Clojure
Sun Nov 25 12:28:52 CET 2007
That could be a testimonial of the failure of the Java Language, but
it might be a success story for the Java Virtual Machine.
The interesting thing about those 287 languages is that they work both
ways. It is not only that you can call existing Java libraries, but
you can embed those 287 languages within your application. It is like
selecting any language for the task at hand rather than bending the
language you have to fit every task.
Projects like Jython and JRuby are really picking up steam. JRuby
v1.1 now out performs the C Ruby interpreter.
On Nov 25, 2:56 am, "Valentin Micic" <> wrote:
> Couldn't these ~300 languages you're mentioning serve as the best
> testimonial about magnitude of Java's failure?
> Running these language on top of JVM looks to me like having a headache and
> attempting to cure it by hitting ones kneecap with a big hammer. Hey, head
> is no longer hurting, but good that you're not asking about my knee...
> The cure is: have a healthier life-style. Erlang is one option, the other...
> I've been considering career in agriculture for quite some time now ;-).
> Power of Erlang, IMHO, is substantially embedded in a language itself, thus,
> assuming that Erlang is not suitable for everything, instead of
> "dot-netting" (*) the environment, one should just continue doing what we've
> been doing: integrate with the external environment, whilst preserving the
> identity -- if Erlang is to strive (and, my God, it worked so well for me
> during the last six years), one *must* evangelize the language, not the VM.
> (*) Java, IMHO, was never a step forward. It was a reaction to Microsoft's
> domination of the world... So, when Microsoft introduced dot-net, a (bit
> delayed) reaction was to introduce a bunch of new languages to run on top of
> JVM, to counter a new threat. Why should Erlang sing the same tune? Or am I
> too cynical?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robin Bhattacharyya" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2007 5:12 AM
> Subject: [erlang-questions] Erlang vs Clojure
> > Smerl manipulates erlang at the abstract form, so smerl is kinda like
> > a lisp macro. A lispy erlang would make erlang easier to manipulate.
> > Paul Graham makes the case in his book On Lisp that some special forms
> > are only possible by using macros.
> > Rich Hickey, the author of Clojure, makes the case that in the past
> > lisps failed to catch on because they were off on an "island" with
> > their own runtimes. The legacy of Java will be the JVM not the Java
> > language, as there are currently ~300 languages targeting the JVM.
> > I think a lispy syntax, with the concurrency principles of Erlang,
> > running on the JVM runtime, could be a powerful combination.
> > _______________________________________________
> > erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions mailing list
More information about the erlang-questions