[erlang-questions] The future of Erlang and BEAM

Miles Fidelman mfidelman@REDACTED
Sat Feb 11 15:44:56 CET 2012

Radek wrote:
> Hi Miles,
> Well, although I didn't mean to write a new language (I meant writing 
> Erlang-for-JVM, but rather as a DSL), I agree that Erlang IS very 
> mature and stable. And of course, it started as a industry-level 
> language, so it's designed to operate as such.
> I was just wondering if and maybe we could benefit from being hosted 
> on JVM which is, although not THAT industrial-level, also capable of 
> being used in such conditions and is most popular VM on the world (so 
> far). The obvious advantage of using Erlang in such conditions would 
> be (apart from above) just not using verbose Java, which is big plus 
> on it's own :) (in my opinion).
> So, if we could have both of the worlds, i.e. industry-level of OTP 
> and JVM ubiquity, that would be something huge I think.

But why would I want to run massively concurrent software on a JVM?  
What makes Erlang different are its underpinnings.  Massive concurrency 
on top of a JVM is just broken.

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list