3 ms·

Putting an Erlang-like language on the JVM would really lose all the advantages of Erlang, wouldn't it. The syntax, while very useful, isn't the real strength o

• brianpgordon 7y ago
  It looks like this is actually running the real Erlang/OTP, just with some amount of performance penalty from not being on the BEAM. This could be fantastic for fans of BEAM languages who now have a low-profile way to introduce, say, an Elixir proof of concept into a JVM-dominated infrastructure.
  • cuddlecake 7y ago
    Would it really matter though, whether the underlying VM is JVM or BEAM, if people don't want to code in Erlang or Elixir? I don't think introducing the BEAM is the hard part, I think it's all about the language barrier.
    • lostjohnny 7y ago
      In my experience the opposite is true. I've been able to introduce the BEAM in a large company (where I work) but the barrier has been they don't know it, they know very well the JVM and they don't care about the language if it can produce a runnable jar. I would really use the JVM more if I could program it in Elixir.
    • verttii 7y ago
      Personally I spent most of my learning curve on the BEAM facilities rather than Elixir itself. Elixir as a language is simple and fairly imperative, it's quick to pick up. Using the language for data transformations and such is a breeze but learning the concurrency primitives, message passing, OTP tooling and behaviors is where the real work is in my opinion, when building distributed systems on top of BEAM.