Support for non-unique process labels?

[Stanislav Ledenev]

>
> I don't think the choices that the OTP team has made are wrong. I have
> been working with Erlang since R13 and there is no doubt in my mind that
> OTP-24 is immensely better than R13 used to be (R13: Unicode? What's
> that?). That doesn't mean everything has been fixed of course. But a lot
> of work has already been done to improve Erlang/OTP in the direction you
> wish for it to go.

Furthermore I can clearly say that OTP-24 is much better than OTP-18.
And I really appreciate all members of the OTP team for such a great work
and well balanced decisions they make which helps Erlang remain Erlang.

пн, 10 мая 2021 г. в 12:52, Loïc Hoguin <essen@REDACTED>:

> On 10/05/2021 11:37, Nicolas Martyanoff wrote:
> > At the end of the day, the answers here remind me of the Common Lisp
> > community. "Everything is fine, if you do not like it the problem is
> > you". After some time, people who get fed up leave, and the language
> > slowly dies.
>
> Every time someone complains about what Erlang/OTP is missing, and the
> community explains why things are the way they are, the person
> complaining ends up saying this.
>
> You cannot move forward without understanding where you are. We are not
> saying everything is fine, we are attempting to provide insight into why
> things are the way they are.
>
> The only languages that are able to cater to just about every use case
> are the ones that have either tons of users or have a strong corporate
> backing, or both. Other languages have to make choices and prioritize
> some things over others.
>
> I don't think the choices that the OTP team has made are wrong. I have
> been working with Erlang since R13 and there is no doubt in my mind that
> OTP-24 is immensely better than R13 used to be (R13: Unicode? What's
> that?). That doesn't mean everything has been fixed of course. But a lot
> of work has already been done to improve Erlang/OTP in the direction you
> wish for it to go.
>
> The fact that we largely went from "write a NIF to C libs" to "write an
> Erlang lib to implement the missing bits" is a strong testament to that.
> All that remains is making sure those missing bits make it into the
> standard library, rather than external libs.
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Loïc Hoguin
> https://ninenines.eu
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20210510/22478dd7/attachment.htm>