[erlang-questions] Erlang VM in Rust
Tue Sep 26 00:22:59 CEST 2017
sure thing, it is matter of taste and experience and whole lot of factors
i agree that compile times are abysmal (that's due C legacy which was major
goal for C++ and of course hardware limitations back in 80's)
but for me quality of interfaces that you can achieve is stunning (again my
to add criticism, macros should be banished, and OOP is overused in C++,
implicit conversions are not nice, visitor pattern is problem, etc.
discipline is the thing in c++
but as it has memory model defined, lifetime management and things like
that i think it would be good fit for implementing erlang for IoT
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:53 PM, Oliver Korpilla <>
> This is, of course, something that can easily devolve into a holy war
> where everyone clamors for their favorite programming language.
> But cannot resist... XD
> I never felt empowered by C++ templates. I find that code written heavily
> depending on templates to drastically decrease in readability (and hence
> maintainability) while the compile times of C++ are just plain horrible
> (btw a side effect of how templates were put into the language in the first
> place). It has been a major pain at my workplace when it comes to running
> continuous integration.
> I learned about a dozen languages well enough to do projects in them, and
> C++ will always be the ugly one that I want to get away from but which is
> without alternative in the minds of project managers.
> Gesendet: Montag, 25. September 2017 um 23:38 Uhr
> Von: "Karlo Kuna" <>
> An: "Erlang-Questions Questions" <>
> Betreff: Re: [erlang-questions] Erlang VM in Rust
> Just to add a voice in this discussion ,
> i would love to see c++ implementation of erlang, and it soul be possible
> due power of templates get much more
> safe and easily extendible code base IMHO. It would require lot of
> expertise and _discipline_ but i cold be fun project
> also I wold love to have erlang implementation for IoT, as erlang seems to
> be great fit for that
> for this one i am with Joe, we need something small portable (and written
> in c++ of course)
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Richard A. O'Keefe <
> [mailto:]> wrote:
> On 25/09/17 10:41 PM, Attila Rajmund Nohl wrote:2017-09-23 9:28 GMT+02:00
> Oliver Korpilla <[mailto:]>:
> [...]Having said that I see no immense security risk in writing code for a
> remote sensor in C. It avoids one of the prime security risks: human user
> interactions and all the buffer overrun problems and string processing
> stuff that is so hard to do safely that there are still books being written
> If it is connected to the internet (the first letter in IoT), then it
> at least needs to handle IPv4 - and it involves parsing of potentially
> untrusted data.
> The remote sensors I am interested in are *not* connected to the
> internet. They are connected via radio to each other and to base
> stations, and the base stations may then be connected to the
> internet (probably using an OS and IP stack written in C).
> There is a serious point here that *end* devices are likely to be
> as small as you can get away with. Instead of spending money on
> bigger/faster machines, it's rather more useful to have *more*
> machines that are just capable enough to do the job.
> Other people may be interested in other things.
> erlang-questions mailing list
> __________________________________________ erlang-questions mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions