A History of Erlang (2007)

Re:A History of Erlang (2007) by imglorp on Monday April 06, 2020 @04:33PM (#22797522)

All true, plus other advantages, but I think there are some business requirements that prevent adoption. The syntax and runtime model are unfamiliar and there aren't enough users to get dependable critical hire biomass on a new project. Lots of management would rather have a lot of average, commoditized labor than a little rare, elite few.

It's especially tragic because we keep repeating the same mistakes and discoveries over and over that OTP+Erlang solved ages ago. Eg most environments are still dinking around with clumsy hacks to help with GC and concurrency issues.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A History of Erlang (2007) by cpach on Monday April 06, 2020 @04:41PM (#22797622)

“Lots of management would rather have a lot of average, commoditized labor than a little rare, elite few.”

Very well put and probably very true.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A History of Erlang (2007) by lostcolony on Monday April 06, 2020 @04:45PM (#22797672)

It is. Management will invariably say "We want the best!", and they may even pay comparable to FAANG levels, but when it comes to language/runtime, it's "We need to be consistent" and "We need something we can hire for".

Meaning even if management understands that a language/framework can be a competitive advantage, they will still be optimizing for lowest common denominator.

[ Parent | on HN ]