4 ms·
> There are lots of curious questions here, like why are there more defects in Erlang and Java than Perl and Ruby? Maybe because Erlang and Java are used for p
by zvrba 12y ago
> There are lots of curious questions here, like why are there more defects in Erlang and Java than Perl and Ruby?
Maybe because Erlang and Java are used for projects of higher complexity (larger scope, more interacting components, etc.)? Did the authors try to address this issue at all?
- pdpi 12y agoThe standout result for me that led me to believe this was very likely the case was that Erlang scored _horribly_ on concurrency bugs. To me, that makes sense: you're seeing all the bugs that come from trying to tackle tricky high concurrency situations, which is why people picked Erlang in the first place. If people tried to tackle those exact same problems in other languages, we'd probably see them doing worse at concurrency.
- lostcolony 12y agoNot to mention the Erlang mantra of 'let it fail'. They're tracking bugs, not severity. Someone may file an issue "hey, in this instance, this thing goes wrong", but because of the supervision process, it doesn't actually cause anything to break (just a logged error message and a bit of system churn). The language actively encourages you to code happy path, and address failure conditions only as necessary, relying on the supervision tree to handle errors that stem from deviating off the happy path.