> The funny thing is that precisely what got me into Go was replacing an Erlang system that was constantly falling over despite quite considerable efforts As t

> The funny thing is that precisely what got me into Go was replacing an Erlang system that was constantly falling over despite quite considerable efforts As the meme goes, Will Ferrel gets a deep puff of smoke from his cigarette and says "I don't believe you". I agree that Go has better type system and Erlang/Elxir/BEAM languages in general. Absolutely. But I think you're showing bias and were already looking for an excuse not to use Erlang. That's completely fair but I think you are non-fairly misrepresenting the exact merits of the decision. > This is part of what I mean; Erlang doesn't have access to special CPU instructions that make supervision trees possible. They're just code. Everything is "just code", dude. Yours is no more an argument than technologically advanced aliens visiting us and exclaiming "How come you don't have super-alloys that can withstand atmosphere entry without losing atoms? It's just chemistry!" --- I am getting the vibe that you're one of those super-programmers that can tinker with everything and the computers have no secrets from them. That, or you are bragging too much. And you should know something else -- I am not a huge fan of Elixir these days. I work with it for 5 years but it's showing some cracks and lack of community (and core team) attention in critically important areas for the ecosystem's advancement -- like compiler instrumentation, or tooling to modify code in an automated way -- not to mention the dynamic typing. I get it, it's far from the magic many fans are making it out to be. But you are discounting very real advantages in a very dismissive manner. For the record, if one Rust runtime gains most of Erlang's OTP capabilities tomorrow then I'll switch to Rust for 100% of my work next week. But nobody has surpassed OTP's capabilities. Finally, I'll also agree that we don't need 100% of OTP -- that much we are in complete agreement on. But as you yourself pointed out, cancelling running background threads is still mostly an unsolved problem so just scoffing at a technology that has mostly achieved that is a very uncharitable take that makes me question your other arguments and wonder if they are not emotional arguments. I am by no means a super-programmer. On my non-humble bragging days I'd say that I'm only very slightly above average. But I've tried to duplicate OTP in at least 3 other languages and I failed miserably every time (Java was one of them). So yeah, don't just say "meh, I can invent OTP everywhere else". No. You really can't. If you can, open-source this effort and I'll donate, I promise.