<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
I'm still a novice, but I can clearly say that Erlang is a nice
language to play with; There is short period of time needed to
convert the working prototype to full solution, since it's sometimes
just the case of clearing/adding some API (because you already use
gen_server, gen_fsm, ...) etc. <br>
<br>
Moreover, I think that many times it's just simpler to use Erlang
compared to Java/C++/... because you don't have such difference from
model (when it's said "sending message from object A to object B) to
implementation. In Erlang you actually send a message and don't have
to bother to properly implement Observer pattern and all that stuff.
So it's a huge advantage of both Erlang style on concurrency &
functional programming.<br>
<br>
I was just wondering if making it on JVM wouln't be a good idea, but
I realized I didn't put some thing under consideration (like safety
and truly fault-tolerance). And, it seems it's easier to make Erlang
faster by researching for better algorithm/solution or sacrificing
some performance for overall better (in terms of speed/reliability
ratio) quality of product than trying to make things to work the
same way on platform(-s) that wasn't designed for it in the first
place.<br>
<br>
Greetings,<br>
Radek<br>
<br>
W dniu 2012-02-11 23:06, Jesper Louis Andersen pisze:
<blockquote cite="mid:4F36E681.90807@erlang-solutions.com"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
On 2/11/12 11:34 AM, Radek wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4F36442D.1060202@gmail.com" type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<font size="-1"><font face="Verdana"><br>
So the question arises: is Erlang still the best platform to
build such demanding applications ? Wouldn't it be better if
we stick to one, very mature (J)VM and try to make it even
better than trying to achieve something similar with less
resources available (size of OTP team vs. JVM team,
supporters, etc) ? And is it possible at all to achieve this
kind of performance and adoption with BEAM ?<br>
</font></font><br>
</blockquote>
Performance is but one of many aspects of writing a program.
Usually performance is possible, but bounded by human time spent.
That is, if you have limited time, say 3 days, to implement
something then usually the solutions are very different
performance wise. One of the distinct advantages of Erlang is how
fast you can build up prototypes and make them run. This means you
have ample time to sit back and tune your system for better
performance. You have more time to change algorithms and tune for
faster execution.<br>
<br>
Another strength of Erlang is that programs can evolve. Adding
another process with a certain responsibility or altering the
internal implementation of a process is easy: the messages passed
forces an API between your components. This yields a system where
you can gradually build it up over time.<br>
<br>
Erlang is a rarely seen triumvirate: fault-tolerance,
distribution+message passing, and functional sequential
programming. You often see other systems implementing one or two
of those, but I have not yet seen all three implemented in another
language. This places Erlang in a niche, and I think many people
who do take time to learn the details enjoy the ideology of Erlang
as a fabric for program construction.<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Jesper Louis Andersen
Erlang Solutions Ltd., Copenhagen, DK</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:erlang-questions@erlang.org">erlang-questions@erlang.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions">http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>