3 ms·
You're right of course, like the first time you hit a race condition (with a week of debugging) and build a distributed lock system. You publish it and people f
by bthornbury 9y ago
You're right of course, like the first time you hit a race condition (with a week of debugging) and build a distributed lock system. You publish it and people find it useful!
Only to realize later postgres offers fine locking capabilities far beyond what you've created (now that you get it).
Then you realize that all anybody is doing is creating subsets of Erlang (half serious). So why aren't we all using that?
In the grand scope, is it really a bad thing?
We end up with X ways to solve problem Y and you never know X + 1 could have some advantages. Exploration should be encouraged IMO!
- mannykannot 9y agoUnfortunately, we get a whole lot of ad-hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow reinventions of the wheel for every better mousetrap. Usually (though not always) the best simple solutions come from those who understand where the complexity lies.
- andrewflnr 9y agoExploration will be far more effective, and get farther, if it learns from previous expeditions, starts from established frontier outposts, etc. Is there a superset of Common Lisp and Erlang? Such a language would be unmatched for already containing everyone's clever ideas!
- matt_kantor 9y ago> Is there a superset of Common Lisp and Erlang? http://lfe.io http://lfe.io :)