<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16735" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">A natural question at this point (at
least for me) would be: Why do we want to change the language? I'll dare to put
forward a view that claims that there is *nothing wrong with ERLANG*. My
justification for this view is as follows:</SPAN><SPAN
lang=EN-ZA><?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA><FONT
size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"> <o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">If you use ERLANG as much as I do,
sooner or later you have to realize that it is far easier… well, if not easier
than – profitable and more useful; therefore, far better, to change oneself than
the language. It is true: whenever I hit the wall, all I had to do was to think
a bit differently (*) and I’d be on a high ground again.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">So, why indeed do we try to change
the language? If the goal is to make it a better, we should stick to what worked
so far – gradual evolution as opposed to
change-the-syntax-and-everything-but-vm-revolution. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">If the purpose is to gain the
“masses” (**), as I understood it once, well, no amount of changes to the
language will help. For that one just need money and marketing – hence lots
of money. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:place
w:st="on"><st1:country-region w:st="on"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">BR.</SPAN></st1:country-region></st1:place><SPAN
lang=EN-ZA style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">V.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">(*) Mind you, in some other
environments (say, languages, run-times, etc.) no amount of thinking differently
would help.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">(**) Or critical mass, which is,
IMHO, just euphemism for masses.</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-ZA
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </P></FONT>-----
Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=rvirding@gmail.com href="mailto:rvirding@gmail.com">Robert
Virding</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=steven.charles.davis@gmail.com
href="mailto:steven.charles.davis@gmail.com">Steve Davis</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=erlang-questions@erlang.org
href="mailto:erlang-questions@erlang.org">erlang-questions@erlang.org</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, November 16, 2008 4:51
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [erlang-questions] Erlang
3000?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>2008/11/16 Steve Davis <SPAN dir=ltr><<A
href="mailto:steven.charles.davis@gmail.com">steven.charles.davis@gmail.com</A>></SPAN><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">
<DIV class=Ih2E3d><BR>On Nov 15, 6:07 pm, Zvi <<A
href="mailto:ex...@walla.com">ex...@walla.com</A>> wrote:<BR>> What
you suggesting can be divided into 2 tasks:<BR>> 1. New language
spec<BR>> 2. New standard library<BR><BR></DIV>Of course <A
href="http://1.is" target=_blank>1.is</A> vastly harder than 2.<BR><BR>My
estimate is that writing and getting consensus on 1 would indeed<BR>take
until 3000AD.</BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><BR>At least! :-) Seriously I don't think you can aim for complete
consensus, you will never get it. You need to start out with some form of
rationale which lays down the basic ideas/principles for the new erlang, and
explains the reasons behind them. This is something which, unfortunately, we
never did.<BR><BR>Once this is done it is easier to design and develop the
system.<BR><BR>Robert<BR><BR></DIV></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>erlang-questions
mailing
list<BR>erlang-questions@erlang.org<BR>http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>