3 ms·
> Not wanting to rely on a fairly esoteric in-house language makes some sense. Not necessarily… thst language clearly was a competitive advantage
by znpy 4y ago
> Not wanting to rely on a fairly esoteric in-house language makes some sense.
Not necessarily… thst language clearly was a competitive advantage
- ilikehurdles 4y agoReminds of Paul Graham’s essay on Lisp being a secret weapon for Viaweb, Beating The Averages[1]. [1]: http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html
- arp242 4y agoThere's pros and cons to these kind of things. "Best tool for the job" reasoned purely from a technical point of view isn't necessarily the "best tool for the job" when everything is factored in. It's hard for me to judge one way or the other; I wasn't at Ericsson in 1998, or indeed, ever at Ericsson. I just figured that the language wasn't open source at the time and that they came back on their decision just a few year later were important bits missing from the previous comment.
- di4na 4y agoThere have been second hand report of the current leadership at Ericsson saying that opensourcing erlang was the worst decision they had taken. As it would have given way a massive competitive advantage.
- panick21_ 4y agoThey are idiots then. Erland would simply not be as good if it was not open. companies not understanding open source is just so annoying.
- di4na 4y agoPossibly but... Nearly 80% of OTP development is and has always been, done internally at Ericsson. And they barely use the libraries from the outside world. From inside Ericsson, erlang look a lot like a proprietary language