3 ms·

I mean that if you want to do something with e.g. python it is pretty easy to access what is good about python. You can make a script, make it "pythonic", use s

by njepa 7y ago

I mean that if you want to do something with e.g. python it is pretty easy to access what is good about python. You can make a script, make it "pythonic", use some modules and package it. And that sort represents a good, useful, python program. With Erlang it is generally a lot harder to access what it is good at. Not only do you have to learn the language, which is a bit different, but things like how to configure and distribute the virtual machine, how the concepts of otp works and maybe even things like dialyzer. I realize that I don't have to learn all that, but still the distance from writing a simple program to what is the unique features is still a lot longer. At least that is my impressions.

Jtsummers 7y ago
So my follow up question then: How would you do distributed programming in Python? Could you do it quickly and easily in a Pythonic way without needing to learn those same kinds of things as Erlang? I feel that you may be close to an apples-and-oranges comparison there. Erlang is several things: language, distributed system, and almost-OS. If you want to do distributed systems in any language, it'll be a steep learning curve. I cut my teeth on that in college with OpenMPI (paired with OpenMP for local parallelism) in C and Fortran. It wasn't too hard, but someoene else had set up the server to actually distribute the MPI jobs across all the nodes, I had no idea how to do that setup. With Erlang, if someone else has already set up the nodes for you it's not really any harder than MPI to handle distribution of work across those nodes. Once you start trying to configure and administer the distributed system, yes it'll be somewhat complex. Same thing with the various Java application servers I used a decade or so ago. The language itself, however, permits programming in an Erlangic way without needing to involve OTP or multiple nodes or dialyzer. Processes and message passing are very accessible and easy to use, permitting a way of structuring programs that's very Erlangic. OTP permits a more consistent and uniform way that's in line with what other systems do and might expect (if you were to pass your modules off to them to be put into a larger system), but it's not needed for writing an Erlangic program. Pattern matching and recursion are other quintessential features of Erlang and encourage a particular program design, also accessible without reaching for those other tools.
- njepa 7y ago
  It is an apples and oranges comparison because they are. Python exposes it's feature fairly readily in a relatively similar context. If I can open "Erlang Studio", plot my nodes, write my recursive functions and run them to some effect on some "Erlang Application Server" then Erlang would be as well. But as far as I know I can't. And I think that makes the application of Erlang somewhat inaccessible. One could of course "just" use Erlang the language, but that use case has a lot more competition.

by njepa 7y ago

Jtsummers 7y ago

So my follow up question then: How would you do distributed programming in Python? Could you do it quickly and easily in a Pythonic way without needing to learn those same kinds of things as Erlang? I feel that you may be close to an apples-and-oranges comparison there. Erlang is several things: language, distributed system, and almost-OS. If you want to do distributed systems in any language, it'll be a steep learning curve. I cut my teeth on that in college with OpenMPI (paired with OpenMP for local parallelism) in C and Fortran. It wasn't too hard, but someoene else had set up the server to actually distribute the MPI jobs across all the nodes, I had no idea how to do that setup. With Erlang, if someone else has already set up the nodes for you it's not really any harder than MPI to handle distribution of work across those nodes. Once you start trying to configure and administer the distributed system, yes it'll be somewhat complex. Same thing with the various Java application servers I used a decade or so ago. The language itself, however, permits programming in an Erlangic way without needing to involve OTP or multiple nodes or dialyzer. Processes and message passing are very accessible and easy to use, permitting a way of structuring programs that's very Erlangic. OTP permits a more consistent and uniform way that's in line with what other systems do and might expect (if you were to pass your modules off to them to be put into a larger system), but it's not needed for writing an Erlangic program. Pattern matching and recursion are other quintessential features of Erlang and encourage a particular program design, also accessible without reaching for those other tools.

njepa 7y ago
It is an apples and oranges comparison because they are. Python exposes it's feature fairly readily in a relatively similar context. If I can open "Erlang Studio", plot my nodes, write my recursive functions and run them to some effect on some "Erlang Application Server" then Erlang would be as well. But as far as I know I can't. And I think that makes the application of Erlang somewhat inaccessible. One could of course "just" use Erlang the language, but that use case has a lot more competition.