[erlang-questions] Erlang Syntax - again

[Robert Virding]

Hello all,

I have read Damien's post and Yariv's reply. My question is: they say what
they don't want, but what do they actually want? I mean this question
seriously. Perhaps someone who is new to the language could answer and tell
what they found most difficult when learning the syntax. I have spoken
Erlang so long that I see it as natural, warts and all.

Even records look like they do for a specific reason and it is harder than
you would think to change them. Other Erlang features force issues.

Getting back. What do people want? Do they want something that looks like
Java, or C++, or Python, or Perl, or ... ? This is actually possible to do,
BUT (there is always a but) you would not have the Java or C++ or Python or
... semantics, you would still have Erlang semantics. Would we then get
complaints that while it looks like Java it doesn't behave like Java, and
why not?

As I said I am serious about this question, even if we don't do a JFE (Java
Flavoured Erlang) it would be interesting to know what people want. Do
people know what they want? Is or is it just that it looks and behaves
differently to what they are used?

Robert
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20080310/38183b2f/attachment.htm>