For namespacing, Erlang used to have packages to provide something a bit like that: http://www.erlang.se/publications/packages.html http://www.erlang.se/publica

For namespacing, Erlang used to have packages to provide something a bit like that: http://www.erlang.se/publications/packages.html http://www.erlang.se/publications/packages.html They ended up being rarely used, and were eventually stripped out of the system as they ended up confusing regulars more than anything. The issue with trying to add namespacing to Erlang is that people think of namespacing modules, but they forget about the other global namespaces: process names, ETS table names, and so on. They'd need to be done all at once, or otherwise they risk giving you inconsistent results. For example say I namespace myapp.mymodule.erl, and inside of this I contact the process named 'mymodule' and the table also named 'mymodule'. If I'm not careful and pass that name around, will it still refer to a global namespace (which can clash), or will it now refer to a different process and table in another namespace? Fixing this requires changing a lot about the language, I think, and it's probably a far bigger challenge than it looks. For documentation: there's http://www.erlang.org/erldoc http://www.erlang.org/erldoc that's a searchable one, and http://erldocs.com/ http://erldocs.com/ that provides more modern design to the reference manuals. Erlang may need better marketing, but as a person from the community, I'd like to hear what I could do. "Just do it better" is hard to build on, I guess. It's reminiscent of "make the logo pop more" for designers.