[erlang-questions] Erlang vs Clojure

[Torbjorn Tornkvist]

Ciprian Dorin Craciun wrote:
> On Nov 23, 2007 6:19 PM, Torbjorn Tornkvist <tobbe@REDACTED> wrote:
>> Ciprian Dorin Craciun wrote:
>>>     I would see the benefit of a Lisp-syntax-based Erlang version --
>>> but compiled to beam... Just see the recent posts on macros and other
>>> Lisp functionalities.
>> Why not implement a Scheme to Erlang-Core compiler then?
>>
>> Just focus on the sequential parts and let concurrency
>> hide inside modules written in Erlang. I did some
>> experiments like this with a Haskell syntax:
>>
>> http://blog.tornkvist.org/blog.yaws?id=1190846785574003
>>
>> Cheers, Tobbe
>>
>>
>>>     Ciprian.
>>>
>>>     P.S.: When I say Lisp I mean the whole Lisp family, but I would
>>> incline to Scheme.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 23, 2007 12:48 AM, Robin Bhattacharyya <robi123@REDACTED> wrote:
>>>> This is a quick qualitative comparison of Erlang and Clojure:
>>>>
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_thread/thread/2a2b24ffef5d1631
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone see the benefit of a Lispy version of Erlang on the JVM?
>>>>
>>>> Robin
> 
>     This would be the basic idea... But for now I lack the time to do
> it... (And I would also have to study the bytecode specification.)

No you don't have to look into the bytecode!
Erlang Core is nothing more/less than an enriched
lambda calculus. This means that it should be pretty easy to
translate a Scheme syntax into Erlang Core (see the paper by
Richard Carlsson that describes the Erlang Core).

> 
>     Just a some minor complaints (so they can be ignored :) I would
> gladly use Erlang for most projects I am working on -- which usually
> reside on server side -- if:
>     -- I would have a nice macro system that blends into the normal
> syntax -- for example in Common Lisp 'or' is implemented as a macro,
> but you don't notice it...
>     -- I would have proper support for strings, for example an object
> that resembles binary but which is specially built for string
> processing.
>     -- I would have proper / mature / stable / feature-full libraries
> for all kind of activities (database access, XML processing, etc.)
>     But as I have seen from this group Erlang still has problems in
> this areas...

I don't think Erlang has got (big) 'problems' in these areas.
We have (and are) doing amazing stuff in Erlang since a long time now.
And frankly, I don't care if the world don't realize the power of
Erlang. I'm just happy as long as I can use it as my 'secret weapon'...

Cheers, Tobbe