[erlang-questions] node.js vs erlang

Karl Nilsson kjnilsson@REDACTED
Thu Jun 19 10:05:43 CEST 2014

I followed the cowboy getting started tutorial and found it very reassuring
to be taken all the way to generating a release. I am pretty sure I could
build on that sample and actually create something that could be used. I
think there is a lot of value in that. Personally I find tweet sized
getting started examples very unsatisfactory and prefer something that
gives and indication of workflow as well as the language. Hipsters may feel


On 19 June 2014 00:30, Loïc Hoguin <essen@REDACTED> wrote:

> On 06/18/2014 10:22 PM, Kenneth Lundin wrote:
>> That is what I meant, you are using a more complex setup with Erlang in
>> order to get more features. So the comparision with other languages
>> "simple setup" is not fair.
> The setup is more complex but the way we get there isn't. Have you read
> the getting started chapter[1]? The release part is smaller than it would
> take to explain "erl -run" or "erl -s": we don't have to write extra code
> for it, we don't have to manually setup paths, we don't have to deal with
> reltool, and so on. It's literally "create relx.config, put this in it, run
> make again". Bam you got a release. That part can't get any simpler.
> Erlang *is* more complex to use than many other languages (it is still
> simpler than C, C++ and the like though). Either you do things manually by
> downloading dependencies manually and such, or you use a build system like
> erlang.mk (or rebar) to automate things which requires you to create an
> OTP application.
> Because erlang.mk automates the use of relx to build releases it is
> actually simpler to make a release than manually setup paths and whatnot.
> We just have to create the one file! We don't deal with reltool here,
> creating the release is *really* easier than not.
> There's no simpler alternative to all that in the Erlang ecosystem. We
> will be able to make it a little simpler by having templates instead of
> making the user copy things, but the getting started chapter will not go
> down in length dramatically because of this.
> We could remove all explanations to make it perhaps half the size it
> currently is, but then we removed all explanations. It's a chapter about
> getting started, it's supposed to provide initial pointers to users, not
> just get them to run an example and then ask themselves "now what?". We
> have actual examples for people that want that already.
> I am not even sure what triggers all these good comments about the nodejs
> documentation. Sure it has a 6 lines and 1 command example on its front
> page. There's no denying that. Then what? A link to API docs. I have *no*
> idea how people manage to learn how to use it. Surely by using other
> resources than these, because while I'm confident I could run the front
> page example quickly, I am also confident that's about all I could do with
> it for a rather long time until I manage to figure out how to do anything
> meaningful, if I were to only use the official docs.
> [1] http://ninenines.eu/docs/en/cowboy/HEAD/guide/getting_started/
> --
> Loïc Hoguin
> http://ninenines.eu
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

*Karl Nilsson*
twitter: @kjnilsson
blog: coderkarl.wordpress.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20140619/64c5489b/attachment.htm>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list