[erlang-questions] OT: Please highlight me about JAVA C++ as high level languages just like erlang.

Angel clist@REDACTED
Thu Jan 21 16:26:47 CET 2010

So im really displeased to see everyone still closely tied to the "old classic 
high level definition". its dificult to place erlang over a plethora of not 
certainly better languages if all of them are considered equal.

As Paul rants i think the long lisp reluctance is mainly based on such a 
missconception about language expresivennes provided that all being equal 
level so the more C'ish the better.

On Jueves, 21 de Enero de 2010 14:19:08 Attila Rajmund Nohl escribió:
> 2010/1/21, Angel J. Alvarez Miguel <clist@REDACTED>:
> [...]
> > Can be Java High level on the same category as C (pointers, arrays), no
> > closures, bad generics, even no OOP with mehods calls as messages also
> > like C++?
> In my experience everything other than the assembler is considered to
> be a "high level" language. This is probably a couple of decades old
> definition of high level language, created at a time when FORTRAN,
> COBOL and Lisp were the high level languages.
> ________________________________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list