[erlang-questions] Forget Erlang on the Java VM. More language on the Erlang VM are needed!
Wed Nov 28 14:42:42 CET 2007
Joel Reymont wrote:
> On Nov 28, 2007, at 1:14 PM, Michael Regen wrote:
>> I guess the argument that Erlang's performance will certainly be
>> lower under
>> another VM is right.
> This maybe harsh but I think anyone striving for Erlang on the XXX VM
> gets it completely and irreversibly wrong! It's not the _syntax_ that
> gives Erlang its greatest advantage. In fact, I hate the syntax. What
> gives Erlang its ultimate advantage is the VM!
> The VM is what enables lightweight processes, etc. etc. etc. It has
> been mentioned more than a few times that Core Erlang is Lambda
> Calculus. Compile to Core Erlang or directly to the Beam bytecode.
> Take advantage of the Erlang VM!
> There will be absolutely and positively no advantage of running Erlang
> on the JVM, CLR, Mono, Lisp or what have you. There's just no other
> Erlang VM out there, nothing that implements lightweight processes,
> message passing, great support for binaries, etc.
> Write Lisp on the Erlang VM, write Haskell or a new language with an
> elegant syntax. Throw your lot into improving the existing VM.
That is exactly what I've been trying to say in earlier posts.
An experimental Haskell-subset to Erlang-Core compiler already exist.
Who (and what) will be next?
More information about the erlang-questions