[erlang-questions] erlang sucks
Thu Mar 13 15:01:27 CET 2008
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 11:41:10AM +0000, Alp?r J?ttner wrote:
> > Maybe it is due to the fact that most of them know C/C++/Java/Python.
> > Maybe Erlang syntax is not so intuitive and easy as one could expect
> > from a modern and powerful languages.
> > Maybe because the standard library is not so rich and not so
> > consistent as expected from a mature language.
> I cannot agree with it. I grew up in the C/C++ world and also had known
> Python before I met Erlang, still I find it very intuitive. I'm also
> _very_ impressed by the simplicity and the expressive power. (I'm not a
> student though...)
If we should talk about expressiveness, I think that haskell mostly wins
among functional languages. But haskell syntax (just to keep this example)
is far more intuitive and clear (and orthogonal) than Erlang's.
> I think, the major obstacle for newcomers is not the syntax, but the
> immutable data structures, the impossibility of variable rebinding, and
> the miss of loop constructs like 'for' and 'while'. For someone familiar
> (only) with procedural languages, it is hard to believe that a language
> can be efficient without these features.
Those features are not erlang-centric: also Ocaml and haskell would
require a little of an effort for a C programmer. BTW, the little
experience I have in writing Erlang code says that if I had written
it in haskell it would have benn far more readable and nice.
In a couple of words, we don't have just to choose among Erlang OR
imperative programming (C/Java/Python & Co.): we've a lot of choices
in the field of funtional languages, and a couple of them have some
nicer syntax and features compared to Erlang.
[ Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ --- GLUG Catania -- Freaknet Medialab ]
[ me [at] katolaz.homeunix.net -- http://katolaz.homeunix.net -- ]
[ GNU/Linux User:#325780/ICQ UIN: #258332181/GPG key ID 0B5F062F ]
[ Fingerprint: 8E59 D6AA 445E FDB4 A153 3D5A 5F20 B3AE 0B5F 062F ]
More information about the erlang-questions