FAQ terminology harmonisation
Wed Apr 2 13:17:20 CEST 2003
Joe Armstrong wrote:
> The main objection of the "LM" is that "Erlang in not Java/C++" - if
>they allow Erlang they are often taking a big personal risk - they
>actual stand to gain if they have large development teams and everything
>takes a long time - their pay = LengthOfTimeOFPROJECT X #people in
>project - so Erlang is a no no here.
And when the big Java/C++-project is delayed more people are thrown in
and the LM becomes an even bigger LM.
More information about the erlang-questions