[erlang-questions] Surprising conclusion in . Parallel programming environments: less is more

Toby Thain <>
Fri Oct 5 01:19:32 CEST 2007

On 4-Oct-07, at 2:41 PM, David Mercer wrote:

> Ok:
>> Oh, and with about 6,000 natural languages
>> on Earth, we should most of us be so paralysed by choice that we  
>> don't
>> say anything!
> Good point.  I need to go check out some of those other languages  
> to see if
> they would actually be better than English.  Anyone got any  
> suggestions?

To this native English speaker, Latin languages appeal greatly. I'm  
currently learning Brazilian Portuguese, it is as optimal as any  
human language I've been exposed to: Definitely more regular,  
compact, and euphonic than English.


> I've heard Chinese is really good, because one character can convey an
> entire word, rather than having to string multiple characters  
> together.
> On the other hand, the smaller alphabet of English is kind of like  
> a macro
> capability, since you can form new words out of the basic building  
> blocks.
> Maybe a language with a smaller alphabet is better though.  Greek  
> has only
> 24 letters...
> Cheers,
> David
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list