Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

erlang

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 7:47 ID:PQR1tGXw

what does /prog/ think of erlang?

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 7:50 ID:Heaven

Is good.

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 8:25 ID:W5PP0A9q

I've heard great things about it, but still haven't got myself to check it out. At a 5 seconds glance, it looked like Haskell.

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 9:33 ID:hnO5cX0w

The language is decent, about as good as Prolog or Haskell. However, the libraries are the best I've ever seen for the distributed/high availability domain.

Joe Marshall's PhD. thesis is a good overview, and actually very readable.

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 9:53 ID:KLpoBulb

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlang_(programming_language)

Erlang is a general-purpose concurrent programming language and runtime system. The sequential subset of Erlang is a functional language, with strict evaluation, single assignment, and dynamic typing. For concurrency it follows the Actor model.

As far as I can tell, it isn't lazy, which is one of the main reasons why you would use a functional language. Lazy.

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 9:58 ID:Heaven

>>1
OKAY YOU FUQIN ANGERED AN EXPERT PROGRAMMER
GODFUCKIGNDAMN
FIRST OF ALL, YOU DONT FUQIN KNOW WHAT A MAN PAGE IS
SECONDLY, THIS IS /prog/ DO NOT DEMAND USEFUL ANSWERS THE WAY YOU WANT THEM TO BE
THIRDLY PROGRAMMING IS ALL ABOUT PHILOSOPHY AND ``ABSTRACT BULLSHITE'' THAT YOU WILL NEVER COMPREHEND
AND FUQIN LASTLY, FUCK OFF WITH YOUR BULLSHYT
EVERYTHING HAS ALREADY BEEN ANSWERED IN
>>5

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 12:43 ID:RmA6QmfZ

As far as I can tell, it isn't lazy, which is one of the main reasons why you would use a functional language
lolwut?

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 13:00 ID:SPw6W1kT

>>7
you didn't know some people are stupid?

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 14:19 ID:bD5Md9qL

Dynamic typing & strictness & no compiler = fail

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 14:23 ID:SPw6W1kT

>>9
erlang has a compiler
you = thick

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 14:49 ID:bD5Md9qL

>>10
To machine code? But even so it doesn't matter because the dynamic typing doom it to being an utterly average language.

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 14:56 ID:RmA6QmfZ

>>11
For very obvious reasons it compiles to run on a VM. I'd like to see OS threads scale. The context switching would murder you pretty quick.

A compiler is a compiler. Whether it targets x86, JVM, Parrot, LLVM, Erlang's VM, blah blah blah, it's still a compiler.

Also, strictness by default >>> lazy. Reasoning about the time and space complexity of a lazy language is a bitch.

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 15:15 ID:SPw6W1kT

>>11
learn what a compiler is??????

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 15:18 ID:XzwfaqeT

Good.

Except the syntax fail sometimes (records eg.).

For the dynamic typing problem, there is a static analyzer (Dialyzer) for catching most type errors.

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 16:03 ID:8Q/yGUIS

>>14
For reattaching your severed arm, we provide some band-aids.

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 16:43 ID:RmA6QmfZ

As if statically-typed languages are any better. They trade off flexibility for an improvement in the lower bound of errors.

I think the more pragmatically inclined have decided a middle road is best. That's still very much a work in progress. Perl6 seems to have started it, and now some academics have decided to run with it and see where it leads.

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 18:14 ID:2Rpn1lUB

Anally-typed languages are anal.

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 22:05 ID:HQac4eRK

>>12
>I'd like to see OS threads scale.
I thought threading and distributed processing were the main selling points. It was tested with millions of threads; not OS threads, but I don't know what the limits are on the threading mechanism it uses.

Comes from Siemens, which makes telecom switching computers. I've coded for them, and it mostly comes down to a battle between your distributed processes and the network. Your programs want to talk to each other, and the network doesn't want to let them - power outages, incorrect network config files, dumbasses yanking out network and power cables, dumbasses hitting the off switch on the computers without shutting down first, etc.

Erlang has built-in recovery from that kind of interruption in interprocess communication.


 

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 22:11 ID:HQac4eRK

Trivia: "Erlang" is a term from traffic theory, which is a big deal in telephone networks. AT&T spent a LOT of resources making the US telephone network VERY reliable. (When was the last time your land line call was blocked or dropped?) They hired top mathematicians to invent and patent the traffic routing algorithms programmed into the switching computers.

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 23:00 ID:Heaven

Hmm, my last 2 posts seem contradictory.
The unreliable network in 18 is the computer network, not the telephone network in 19. You'd get shot if you hit the off switch on a telephnoe switching machine without proper shutdown.

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 23:20 ID:Sxsnpi0q

wut? "erlang" is the name of a math guy, and the contraction of "ericsson language". it was developed by ericsson.

Name: Anonymous 2007-07-31 23:31 ID:Heaven

You'd get shot if you hit the off switch on a telephnoe switching machine without proper shutdown.
Now i want to do that someday just to see what would happen.

Name: Anonymous 2007-08-01 2:37 ID:Heaven

>it was developed by ericsson.
Yes. I mixed them up there, sorry. I worked with Ericsson, Siemens, and AT&T hardware. Erlang being a mathematical unit in traffic theory and a common word in telephone equipment making companies before the language is still true, though.

Name: Anonymous 2011-06-10 10:47

RIIIIIIISE FROM YOUR GRAVE!

Name: Anonymous 2011-06-10 10:54

>>24
RISE FROM MY ANUS

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List