FAQ terminology harmonisation

John-Olof Bauner John-Olof.Bauner@REDACTED
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 mailing list