[erlang-questions] Erlang and Akka

Péter Szilágyi peterke@REDACTED
Mon Oct 6 10:46:27 CEST 2014


Hey all,

  Sorry for resurrecting a one month old thread. I've been following this
conversation and wanted to throw in an interesting project, but there was
still work going into it so I held my tongue. However, today it went
official so I can take the lid off it.

  The Iris project <http://iris.karalabe.com> just gained official support
<http://iris.karalabe.com/archive/2014/javatars_javatars_everywhere> for
Java and Scala, meaning that beside Erlang (and Go btw), you can do fully
decentralized cloud messaging through the JVM too (and of course, they can
freely and natively interact with each other) :D If you'd like to take a
glimpse at Iris, head over to the teaser presentation (all code executable
online):

   - Erlang: http://play.iris.karalabe.com/talks/binds/erlang.v1.slide
   - Java: http://play.iris.karalabe.com/talks/binds/java.v1.slide
   - Scala: http://play.iris.karalabe.com/talks/binds/scala.v1.slide

  So to answer a question raised in this thread. If you're trying to figure
out whether to go with Akka/Scala or Erlang, maybe Iris will get you both
worlds and you can switch between the languages to your hearth content :)

Cheers,
  Peter

PS: Java and especially Scala takes a toll on the playground VM during
compilation (3+ sec), so patience. Erlang compiles in a blink :)

On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Vlad Dumitrescu <vladdu55@REDACTED> wrote:

>
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Norton Joseph Wayne <
> norton@REDACTED> wrote:
>
>> As an example, the implementation of UBF on GitHub (
>> http://ubf.github.io/ubf/ubf-user-guide.en.html) supports several
>> network formats including UBF(A), Erlang binary format (a.k.a. EBF), and a
>> local procedure call (a.k.a. LPC).  The network formats share the same
>> contract checker implementation.
>>
>
> I saw later your note about the project. Great stuff! It would need a bit
> more of marketing, though :-)
>
> best regards,
> Vlad
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Norton Joseph Wayne <
> norton@REDACTED> wrote:
>
>>
>> A few comments.
>>
>> On 2014/09/02, at 21:13, Vlad Dumitrescu <vladdu55@REDACTED> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Wojtek Narczyński <wojtek@REDACTED>
>> wrote:
>>
>>    - should the contract checker be hard-linked to UBF(A), the wire
>>    format? If used only internally, it seems reasonable to let it understand
>>    the Erlang binary format
>>
>> As an example, the implementation of UBF on GitHub (
>> http://ubf.github.io/ubf/ubf-user-guide.en.html) supports several
>> network formats including UBF(A), Erlang binary format (a.k.a. EBF), and a
>> local procedure call (a.k.a. LPC).  The network formats share the same
>> contract checker implementation.
>>
>> This contract checker implementation operates directly on Erlang terms.
>> There is a lot of surrounding code but the core of the checker is a
>> function that checks Erlang terms against a contract (
>> https://github.com/ubf/ubf/blob/master/src/contracts.erl#L108).
>>
>>
>>    - since 2002, Erlang got type descriptions and specifications; should
>>    these be used for describing the protocols? Again, it seems reasonable to
>>    be able to refer to existing types from the source code.
>>
>>
>> Yes, agreed.
>>
>>
>>    - should it be possible to turn the contract checker on and off,
>>    preferably without performance impact when off?
>>
>> Yes, agreed.
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20141006/21b1a5bc/attachment.htm>


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list