[erlang-questions] Why isn't erlang strongly typed?

Richard O'Keefe ok@REDACTED
Wed Oct 22 04:21:18 CEST 2008

On 22 Oct 2008, at 3:18 am, Steve Davis wrote:

> I'm sure that there's a simple and convincing answer to this.

Because Erlang was designed for systems that are
supposed to be running all the time, even when you
want to install upgraded software with *different*

There have been several attempts to provide type systems
for Erlang.  It took a long time to get one that was
found to be satisfactory in practice, but it's there now
in documentation and in the Dialyzer and Typerl.

However, even that system is not as expressive as one
might wish.
> I'm finding myself having to dig into the source code of libraries or
> plough through often erratic documentation all the time which really
> slows down productivity. Am I thinking about this all wrong?

Probably.  Can you give an example of a problem you had
recently where you found yourself digging into the source code?

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list