[erlang-questions] node.js vs erlang
Thu Jun 19 16:09:02 CEST 2014
I quite agree - if you just want to get _something_ up, and don't
particularly care about any of the long term consequences of your design
decisions, you can do far, _far_ worse than an Angular/Node implementation.
And, FWIW, I quite encourage this, odds are that there will be _no_ long
term consequences :-)
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Mark Nijhof <mark.nijhof@REDACTED
> Could a large part of its success be explained by the fact that making
> anything in either .Net or Java takes such an amount of effort that
> something like Node is seen as a godsent (which in fairness for a lot uses
> it really is). Everyone of those devs knows the language well enough to get
> On Jun 19, 2014 3:42 PM, "Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya" <
> mahesh@REDACTED> wrote:
> "Complexity" is a remarkably loaded term - I'm fairly certain that things
> that are complex for me (Getting anywhere via mass-transit in Tokyo) are
> pretty trivial for others (e.g., Loic).
> Whats more, complexity of systems has nothing to do with the complexity of
> the individual components involved (DNA is a bit of a prime example here).
> That said, I would claim that erlang systems are more _comprehensible_
> than others.
> Mind you, this does require some mastery of erlang, which is not as much
> of a chicken-and-egg scenario as you might imagine.
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Loïc Hoguin <essen@REDACTED> wrote:
>> On 06/19/2014 03:29 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>>> Loïc Hoguin 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? 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.
>>> I think that's highly debatable. At least from my perspective, Erlang
>>> ISN'T more complex than many other languages, and is perhaps simpler,
>>> when you factor in the entire ecosystem required to do any kind of
>>> serious work.
>> I didn't repeat but what I said was about getting started, and in
>> particular in a web development setting, where pretty much every other
>> platform just require you to drop a file in the right folder and you're
>> Erlang is simpler than C for sure, and I don't know (nor care) about Java
>> but I wouldn't be surprised if it was simpler too. Only those aren't really
>> used for web development. (Some people do, but you're a lot more likely to
>> find a PHP web developer than a C/Java one, at least in my experience.)
>> Loïc Hoguin
>> erlang-questions mailing list
> * Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya
> <http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/204a87f81a0d9764c1f3364f53e8facf.png> That
> tall bald Indian guy..*
> * Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/0/108074935470209044442/posts>
> | Blog <http://dieswaytoofast.blogspot.com/> | Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/dieswaytoofast> | LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/dieswaytoofast> *
> erlang-questions mailing list
tall bald Indian guy..*
*Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/0/108074935470209044442/posts> | Blog
<http://dieswaytoofast.blogspot.com/> | Twitter
<https://twitter.com/dieswaytoofast> | LinkedIn
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions