Meta-Erlang (was RE: Erlang vs Java revisited)
Thu Oct 6 21:38:27 CEST 2005
On 10/5/05, Mickael Remond <mickael.remond@REDACTED> wrote:
> Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
> > The Java reflection API, including the new stuff that's needed to
> > do program transformation, is about as think as the local phone book.
> > I come to praise Erlang, not to bury Java, but the effect that the
> > syntactic complexity and irregularity of a language has on code that
> > manipulates that language is important. Consider the whole
> > StringTemplate, er, scratches head for polite term, thingy. To my
> > mind, it's a typically overcomplicated response to the fact that
> > Java is pretty much hopeless at expressing data structures in source
> > code. Working on the same kinds of things in Scheme, I never needed
> > more than backquote and maybe a few calls to a mapping function.
> Regarding Java approach to "metaprogrammation", I found this link:
> Language Oriented Programming: The Next Programming Paradigm
> I thought it could interest the Erlang mailing list.
> This article is kind of ironic. I followed the tutorial and found that
> it was a nice demonstration of why not to use this approach in Java.
> This stuff is terribly complicated, and I suspect hardly maintenable.
> That's funny.
> Mickaël Rémond
> (cathing up with his email backlog)
Why anyone would use Java as anything other than a backend OO assembly, is
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions