[erlang-questions] Erlang basic doubts about String, message passing and context switching overhead
Sat Jan 14 18:08:20 CET 2017
This function works for ASCII only. That's the problem. MICHAł =
2017-01-14 19:36 GMT+03:00 Garrett Smith <g@REDACTED>:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Michał Muskała <michal@REDACTED> wrote:
> > I fully agree there are no languages that deal with strings perfectly.
> > said there are those that are better at it and those that aren't so
> good. A
> > language, where I need to look for a library to upcase or downcase my own
> > name, fits into the second group in my book.
> If you're talking about this:
> > "hello".upcase()
> > string:to_upper("hello").
> I would be tempted to rephrase "Erlang is not good for ..." with
> "Erlang is not what I am used to for ..."
> Some languages invest tremendous effort in programmer convenience and
> fit and finish. I think this is terrific! It's one of the major
> appeals of Elixir vis-a-vis Erlang and has inspired a huge influx of
> creativity and contributions within that ecosystem.
> However, when it comes to the merits of a language (and it's
> libraries, runtime environments, etc.) there are trade offs
> *everywhere* and some of these conveniences come at a high cost. I
> don't think "good" and "bad" are nearly specific enough to help inform
> our decisions about language adoption.
> Now the following is *my very personal opinion* and I'm not grinding
> any ax here, extremely happy to live and let live, but this: I don't
> particularly find writing function(Arg) (as opposed to Arg.function)
> hard, at all - and I *certainly* don't want to pay *any* price in
> terms of added complexity or performance degradation for object
> oriented ish semantics or features. That's me though. I know a lot of
> people really like their language features and thank goodness we have
> erlang-questions mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions