3 ms·
I'll stick with Damien Katz on this: Erlang is based originally on Prolog, a logic programming language that was briefly hot in the 80's. Surely you
by moe 16y ago
I'll stick with Damien Katz on this:
Erlang is based originally on Prolog, a logic programming
language that was briefly hot in the 80's. Surely you've
seen other languages based on Prolog, right? No? Why not?
Because Prolog sucks ass for building entire
applications. But that hasn't deterred Erlang from
stealing it's dynamite syntax.
cf. http://damienkatz.net/2008/03/what_sucks_abou.html http://damienkatz.net/2008/03/what_sucks_abou.html
- troutwine 16y agoUntil our species gets rather better at quantifying the effect of communication mediums' on cognition I take issue with Mr. Katz's assertion. The semantic meaning of Erlang and prolog code is such that ideas can be expressed rapidly, in my experience. Besides, taste in syntax is like taste in tea: you might prefer a light cup of Earl Grey, I might like mine over-brewed and bitter. Prolog's syntax--and by extension Erlang's--is an acquired taste, perhaps; I like them both. Tea time!
- moe 16y agoYou of course have a point in that "you can't argue with taste". However programming languages live and die by the size of their community. Erlang has, by choice of an over-brewed and bitter syntax, drawn itself into a niche much smaller than it deserves. The only chance to escape would be to adapt a more popular taste. Otherwise it will eventually be obsoleted by a language "as powerful as erlang, but minus the arcane syntax".
- troutwine 16y agoI'd like to use that language.