[erlang-questions] Erlang and beam-based scripting languages.
Mon Sep 19 06:22:54 CEST 2011
I don't get it.
You will never edit code that's running live, right?
And you need to arrange to make the update at a minimum be atomic, so that
modules that depend on other modules are all upgraded together, else you'll
get random runtime errors while upgrading.
Thus, you need some way to get code out of your source control, and into
production, in an atomic way.
That needs to be some kind of script.
Having that script also do a "make" first doesn't seem like it will cost
So, where is the cost of "make"? I don't see it.
Are you saying that typing "make" to run tests and check your source code
for problems is somehow a less good use of time for a maintenance engineer
than for a regular engineer?
Are you saying that all sites out there built in Java (another build-based
compilation model), or ASP.NET (another build-based compilation model) are
All large-scale Ruby sites where I have insight (as well as PHP; another
interpreter-based web services language) would dearly love to be able to
catch errors through a "make" rather than have to poke at the code with HTTP
Americans might object: there is no way we would sacrifice our living
standards for the benefit of people in the rest of the world. Nevertheless,
whether we get there willingly or not, we shall soon have lower consumption
rates, because our present rates are unsustainable.
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 3:40 AM, Max Lapshin <max.lapshin@REDACTED> wrote:
> Look. I can do "make", "rebar compile", "cap deploy" or whatever else.
> Question is: what can do a low-priced deploy engineer, that will be
> hired by my customer?
> How does it raise TCO of my product?
> I think (and I will check during following year) that using of
> ruby-like scripting will make it easier and cheaper.
> Scripting, that works without any deploy commands.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions