[erlang-questions] The future of Erlang and BEAM

[Miles Fidelman]

Radek wrote:
> Hi Miles,
>
> Well, although I didn't mean to write a new language (I meant writing 
> Erlang-for-JVM, but rather as a DSL), I agree that Erlang IS very 
> mature and stable. And of course, it started as a industry-level 
> language, so it's designed to operate as such.
> I was just wondering if and maybe we could benefit from being hosted 
> on JVM which is, although not THAT industrial-level, also capable of 
> being used in such conditions and is most popular VM on the world (so 
> far). The obvious advantage of using Erlang in such conditions would 
> be (apart from above) just not using verbose Java, which is big plus 
> on it's own :) (in my opinion).
>
> So, if we could have both of the worlds, i.e. industry-level of OTP 
> and JVM ubiquity, that would be something huge I think.
>

But why would I want to run massively concurrent software on a JVM?  
What makes Erlang different are its underpinnings.  Massive concurrency 
on top of a JVM is just broken.



-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra