rvirding

11 ms·

61.
by rvirding 12y ago
Here is a good talk on getting erlang to talk with other systems, http://www.erlang-factory.com/berlin2014/robby-raschke . It is of course completely accessible from LFE.
62.
by rvirding 12y ago
We all learned prolog at the lab, well at least those of us who used prolog.
63.
by rvirding 12y ago
That about Joe is not strange actually as he has never been a C-programmer. Before coming to the lab he was a fortran programmer.
64.
by rvirding 12y ago
LFE (Lisp Flavoured Erlang) is very much alive with a whole bunch of new stuff now released on the master branch. For example you can now easily write LFE shell scripts and run them, much in them way as with sh. There is also a good webpage
65.
by rvirding 12y ago
That RabbitMQ gives you many of the features you want from Erlang is not that strange really as RabbitMQ is implemented in Erlang. :-)
66.
by rvirding 12y ago
Some people have already been mentioning this but I wish to clarify some things. When Erlang was designed/invented the goal was never to make a new language, the goal was to design a way of building systems with a set of specific cha
67.
by rvirding 12y ago
Did you try to implement your own behaviours? Or processes that aren't behaviours as such but still function correctly in supervision trees and in applications?
68.
by rvirding 12y ago
Yes, it is flawed logic, but you were using so I don't see why you should object to it. And his goal was to show that.
69.
by rvirding 12y ago
Erlang parse transforms give you access to the full AST of a whole module and it must return the full AST of a module. It is like a macro which operates on a module not on a form. They are very powerful but easy to get messed up in.
70.
by rvirding 12y ago
I forgot to mention that if you want to have lisp macros in the erlang ecosystem you have LFE (Lisp Flavoured Erlang) https://github.com/rvirding/lfe or Joxa.
71.
by rvirding 12y ago
I would say that one restriction with the type of macros that elixir has, irrespective of whether we call it homoiconic or not, is that they can only manipulate existing forms in the AST, they can't define new syntactic forms. In elixi
72.
by rvirding 12y ago
Elixir isn't homoiconic, it never was, and they no longer make that claim.
73.
by rvirding 13y ago
Yes, that's me. Where is the "comment below"? Couldn't find it. I just want to point out that I don't dislike Lua at all, it is a small neat language with some very nice features. It just isn't something on whi
74.
by rvirding 13y ago
Actually if you really start asking a lot of people do actually want this but it is often something they don't explicitly mention. It tends to be one of those "of course it must ..." things.
75.
by rvirding 13y ago
The erlang syntax is actually much simpler than Elixir's which both contains more syntax and alternate ways of writing things.
76.
by rvirding 13y ago
From personal experience implementing the string handling is trivial compared to implementing the system side of Erlang. Get real.
77.
by rvirding 13y ago
Yes, and you will end up reimplementing a lot of what is already in Erlang and most likely not as well either. Virding's 1st rule.
78.
by rvirding 13y ago
I am not going to enter into a syntax argument I have already given my views on that here http://rvirding.blogspot.se/2014/01/erlang-syntax-again-and-... . My main point is that the syntax is simple and that it fi
79.
by rvirding 13y ago
Erlang does automatically parallelize over multiple cores. By default it will start one Erlang VM thread per core which work together to run the Erlang system. The Erlang VM also does automatic load balancing over the threads and even tries
80.
Erlang User Conference 13-14 June Stockholm: one day of Early Bird rates left(erlang-factory.com)
1 points by rvirding 13y ago|0 comments
81.
by rvirding 13y ago
Yes, a daddy of 3 children including one daughter. It is still a stupid list.
82.
by rvirding 13y ago
Sorry, can't help it. What a stupid list!
83.
by rvirding 14y ago
Then what are we really measuring? Is it how many connections we get can get on as small a machine as possible? If so then I am sure I can get 600K connections with Erlang in a smaller system. At least running a benchmark. There is one very
84.
by rvirding 14y ago
So? Not really impressed. WhatsApp are getting over 2M concurrent HTTP connections with Erlang in a production system. And this was 1 year ago. http://blog.whatsapp.com/index.php/2012/01/1-million-is-so-2...
85.
by rvirding 14y ago
I think one significant difference is in the actual implementation, or rather its intended use. The BEAM implementation is built to be used in products, it is very stable and bug-free and the OTP team are very cautious when making changes.
86.
by rvirding 14y ago
Yes, in retrospect using = was probably not a very good choice. I will admit some things in Erlang didn't receive much thought before being added while to some things we gave a lot thought; for example the language/systems basic properties
87.
by rvirding 14y ago
Every time I read something about the weird Erlang syntax I get so tired and try and tell myself not to get into the discussion, it's not worth the effort, some people will never just never learn, etc. But sometimes I can't help myself. So
88.
Getting 2.5 Megalines of code to behave(jlouisramblings.blogspot.se)
1 points by rvirding 14y ago|1 comments
89.
by rvirding 14y ago
Sort of. The syntax evolved at the same time we were moving from Prolog onto our own implementation, which forced us to write our own parser and not rely on the original Prolog one. The biggest syntax change came around 1991, since then it
90.
by rvirding 14y ago
As in Prolog ',' and ';' are separators: ',' behaves like an and , first do then and then do this (as in Prolog); while ';' is an or , do this clause or do this clause (again as in Prolog). '.' ends something, in this case a function defi

More ›