Can we quit with the Erlang postings - or rather if a point must be made (and one imagines that the real issue is voting up all the _why stuff) can we post new and thoughtful Erlang stuff ;)
And I like Erlang, but I'm a bit tired of that graph. It's very impressive, but I've seen so many articles parading it around as Exhibit A for why Erlang is great. Now they usually make other points with other evidence, but I think a lot of people stop at the graph and come out with a very shallow understanding (and are let down when Erlang doesn't turn out to be a panacea).
Also, it should be noted that the article is more than 2 years old.
FWIW, the new O'Reilly "Erlang Programming" book also seems pretty good (the several chapters I've read, at least). I'm not sure which I would recommend first, though.
Comments
Can we quit with the Erlang postings - or rather if a point must be made (and one imagines that the real issue is voting up all the _why stuff) can we post new and thoughtful Erlang stuff ;)
Besides recommending "Programming Erlang" which is a well written book, this article offers nothing new.
Agreed.
And I like Erlang, but I'm a bit tired of that graph. It's very impressive, but I've seen so many articles parading it around as Exhibit A for why Erlang is great. Now they usually make other points with other evidence, but I think a lot of people stop at the graph and come out with a very shallow understanding (and are let down when Erlang doesn't turn out to be a panacea).
Also, it should be noted that the article is more than 2 years old.
FWIW, the new O'Reilly "Erlang Programming" book also seems pretty good (the several chapters I've read, at least). I'm not sure which I would recommend first, though.
Erlang is cool. I agree, but what about Haskell? It scales very well too ! (provoking a discussion)
Oh and btw. the article is pretty content less at least if you know Erlang a bit.
All kidding aside, I think I'm going to be checking this out in more detail soon, maybe early next year. Seems like fun.