[erlang-questions] The future of Erlang and BEAM
Sat Feb 11 15:07:42 CET 2012
that's undoubtedly one of the very handy features of Erlang/OTP, which
has roots in it's real-time non-stop usage.
But of course I meant the bigger picture here; live debugging is handy
but can be (quite) easily reproduced on the JVM also (using OSGi framework).
Of course, Erlang has this from many years now which counts as a big
advantage, that's true.
W dniu 2012-02-11 14:58, Attila Rajmund Nohl pisze:
> 2012/2/11, Radek<>:
>> But after "wow effect" has gone, I discovered that there are many high
>> performance Java libraries that seem to resolve many problems that
>> Erlang is theoretically best suited for (real-time, low-latency
>> applications, concurrency, fault-tolerance, etc.). Moreover, it seems
>> that there are things that, despite Erlang profile, are just not
>> possible to achieve on BEAM (like LMAX Disruptor concurrent framework).
>> So the question arises: is Erlang still the best platform to build such
>> demanding applications ? Wouldn't it be better if we stick to one, very
>> mature (J)VM and try to make it even better than trying to achieve
>> something similar with less resources available (size of OTP team vs.
>> JVM team, supporters, etc) ? And is it possible at all to achieve this
>> kind of performance and adoption with BEAM ?
> The feature I really like in Erlang is it's debuggablity. I can
> connect to the live system, I can get an Erlang shell on the VM and
> can inspect the system real time. I can also load code (not only to
> the live system), which makes development really fast.
More information about the erlang-questions