[erlang-questions] My biggest beef with Erlang

[Kenneth Lundin]

Hi,

I agree that there are many bits and pieces where Erlang can and need
to be improved.
There are so many that we have to prioritize among them.

We have to focus on certain areas, the ones that makes most difference
for making Erlang:
- more used in product development where concurrency, fault tolerance,
scalability, time to market, life cycle cost etc. are important.
- continue to improve the SMP support and show how big advantage there is
in using Erlang for making the most of multi core processors.
- Components (OTP Applications) with better support for protocols used
in strategic areas as multi media, E-shopping, Financial,
Telecom-services etc.
I actually think that we need much more and better support in the XML
area, XML-webservices and similar. You don't have to like these
techniques but you still
have to support them.
- easier to deploy products made with Erlang

I don't think improvements in support for parse transforms and a broader use of
parse transforms is one of the most important bits in this.
I even think that it might be negative to broaden the use of parse transforms.
Parse transforms is a way to let developers modify the language or even
define their own new language, when you see a program you will have a hard time
understanding what it means etc. It will be problems for syntax
sensitive editors
etc.
A problem with parse transforms is that anything can be transformed,
you never know what and how until you have understood the parse
transform code it self (or get it explained to you).

/Kenneth

On 11/25/07, Joel Reymont <joelr1@REDACTED> wrote:
> Kenneth,
>
> On Nov 25, 2007, at 7:13 PM, Kenneth Lundin wrote:
>
> > If you like Erlang why do you then almost all the time ask for changes
> > of the language?
>
> There's no limit to perfection. I don't ask for changes to the
> language so much as I ask for bits and pieces to enable me to change
> things myself.
>
>        Thanks, Joel
>
> --
> http://wagerlabs.com
>
>
>
>
>
>