[erlang-questions] The Beauty of Erlang Syntax

Kunthar <>
Tue Feb 24 23:54:25 CET 2009


Someone invents and works hard and some others sucks their bloods.
Companies don't like a thinking guys around. They need docile robots.
Business world starts with a *one* shining idea and every single idea
covered with routine day jobs after the main purpose accomplished.
Java mostly helps everyday jobs at this stage. Helps to corporate IT
managers with automated dummy tests etc. Sure still someone can use it
in Mars Mobile too :)
There is nothing to invent with wiring database to model and getting
some data to controller and fetching bunch of bags to view part.
Erlang and some other tools OTOH, helps to inventor to explore some
other ways of writing a good application.
Erlang would solve the problems in your problem domain or not. A
thinking human being should take a serious decisions on it.
Sure its not always could fit to every single request. There will
always the combination of the tools exist.

But at first, the way of thinking of the most part of the world should
be changed. Do we think for produce a *real*
value for our lives? Whatta hell all those guys doing? Just to stay alive?

Way too much stack trace to compile one target life like ants.

P.S. Subject goes off topic slightly. I discontinue this thread.
Peace
\|/ Kunth




2009/2/25 Kevin Scaldeferri <>:
>
> On Feb 24, 2009, at 1:54 PM, Christian wrote:
>
> In a way, the research that lead to Erlang was about finding a way to
> making it faster to have low-skilled developers cranking out new
> features. It certainly wouldnt be good PR if Erlang was a language for
> highly-skilled developers to slowly cranking out old features.
>
>
>
> I wasn't in the industry at the time, but I'm not sure that the programming
> workforce of the 80's closely resembled the workforce of today (or the past
> decade).
> But, really, one should ask, if Erlang was designed / evolved / selected
> with this goal, why is it that 20 years later most developers have never
> even heard of it?  I guess one possibility would be to blame Ericsson and
> credit MS and Sun for why C# and Java are the languages of choice for
> companies who care more about how easy it is to hire an army of developers
> than anything else.  There could be other possible explanations, though.
> Also, you've exaggerated & distorted my point with your last sentence.
>  Haskell unabashedly markets itself as a language for highly skilled
> developers to quickly and reliably implement new features.  It is still
> unpopular.  Most companies do not like the idea of using a language that
> requires them to find a top 10% or top 1% developer to work on their
> project.
> Of course, you might also have misinterpreted my comment entirely.  I'm
> certainly not promoting this point of view, but just saying that to a lot of
> companies "practical for the real world" means "I can easily hire someone".
>
> -kevin
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 18:14, Kevin Scaldeferri <>
> wrote:
> It's kinda funny how often people think of things like reliability,
> high-availability, etc. as "academic" concerns.  An awful lot of
> companies care primarily about how fast low-skilled developers can
> crank out new features.
>
> -kevin
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> 
> http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>



More information about the erlang-questions mailing list