[erlang-questions] Time for OTP to be Renamed?

[Joacim Grebenö]

Note. I love the Erlang SDK (just trying avoid the *TP word to see how it feels) and use it heavily. It is just the gen_server that takes away the fun. We need more fun and not less.

Den 16 feb 2014 12:28 skrev =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Joacim_Greben=F6?= <jocke@REDACTED>:
>
> I have read http://www.erlang.org/doc/design_principles/spec_proc.html over the years and only opted to implement parts of all the overhead, i.e. to get the part of OTP functionality I really need and no more.
>
> The gen_server is is top heavy and boring and remindes me of Java Enterprise Beans.
>
> Agile and fun is better than top heavy and boring. In the short run, and in the long run.
>
> But this is all me.
>
> Den 16 feb 2014 11:40 skrev Vance Shipley <vances@REDACTED>:
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 11:06:08AM +0100, Joacim Grebenö wrote: 
> > }  I would only use the gen_server iff I needed hot code loading/upgrading. 
> > }  In the real world, and in the majority of cases, that seldom is needed. 
> > }  
> > }  IMHO and within my experience of course. 
> >
> > Lest other, less experienced, readers get the impression that it is that 
> > simple let me just provide this pointer: 
> >
> >    http://www.erlang.org/doc/design_principles/spec_proc.html 
> >
> > To write a program which will work (properly) in an OTP compliant system, 
> > you must receive and handle a number of system messages.  Without OTP 
> > compliance you have no supervision, debugging, release handling, observer 
> > and I don't know what else.  You are free to do so but I wouldn't recommend 
> > this route for anyone else who hasn't mastered the environment. 
> >
> > -- 
> > -Vance 
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions