[erlang-questions] The future of Erlang and BEAM

Tony Rogvall <>
Sat Feb 11 17:19:59 CET 2012


I do agree.

But on the other hand, there is nothing stopping people to implement the Erlang platform, and compete.
So stop talking about it and start hacking. Let the best implementation win ;)

/Tony

On 11 feb 2012, at 17:13, Max Bourinov wrote:

> +1
> 
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Miles Fidelman <> wrote:
> Radek wrote:
> Well, I think it depends. It's true that using default concurrency libraries is quite difficult and error prone but as I said before, thare are others which mimics Erlang approach (and do it well, just looking at numbers).
> 
> But, I'm not sure if it's a good idea to run anything massively concurrent on JVM; that's one of reasons I've started this topic.
> 
> The only way to run something massively concurrent on a JVM is to write a collection of libraries that would look suspiciously like BEAM.  So why bother?
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
> In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> 
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> 
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> 
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

"Installing applications can lead to corruption over time. Applications gradually write over each other's libraries, partial upgrades occur, user and system errors happen, and minute changes may be unnoticeable and difficult to fix"



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20120211/8ae65ccd/attachment.html>


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list