Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why isn't Erlang more popular?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 244 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't Erlang more popular?

#131

Post by wolfeidau »

I have learnt a small amount of it a few times, I use and rely on RabbitMQ every day so it is important I know a bit about it.

That said I just can't get over how bizarre and jarring the syntax is, this paired with the configuration structure and error messages really make it hard to get into to.

Having seen a few talks on the subject I tend to agree, more recently I am using golang for most of the things I intended to do in Erlang.

The reason I chose this route is to stick with a syntax which is common to all the languages i use day to day, while exploring a new, but much smaller toolset for building concurrent applications.

It seemed to me a much wiser route in the long run.

That said I still like the Erlang runtime and the modules it provides, if only the authors of the language could chart a course out of this unusual and sometimes frustrating syntax.

On elixir, I really hope this catches on but unfortunately like coffee script you will still need to get your hands dirty in Erlang if you want to wrap any existing libs or modules available in the runtime, or debug the crazy error messages it produces from time to time.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't Erlang more popular?

#132

Post by vertex-four »

gloob wrote: post #114
vertex-four wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So do it? A huge part of a programming language is, in fact, its community. I'd say that's more important than the language itself; any given feature can and will be replicated, but the community cannot be. I cannot get the maximum out of Haskell if I cannot get involved in its community, which is heavily CS-oriented.

It's unclear to me whether you want "to write a program" or to "get the maximum out of Haskell". Those are two very different goals.

The thing is, I can write a program in any language. The reason for learning a new language would be to learn a new way of thinking, to "get the maximum out of it". If I can't get involved in its community, I can't do that properly.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't Erlang more popular?

#133

Post by dwb »

I really think moaning about the syntax is a bit pathetic. It's not what most programmers are used to, sure, but it's hardly Malbolge, is it? If Erlang/OTP is a good fit for your problem, use it. Learn the syntax. It's really not that hard.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't Erlang more popular?

#134

Post by mietek »

DougWebb wrote: post #33

I haven't looked at Erlang before, so I thought I give it a quick look. Google led me to the Erlang home page[1], which has "What is Erlang" (sounds good) and "What is OTP" (which doesn't bother to define what O, T, and P stand for.) Following the Erlang Quickstart [2] link, I get a page that doesn't really tell me anything about the language. It demonstrates a program that implements a factorial function, then tells…

> The first link to more documentation at the bottom of the page goes to a book's website, so that's a dead end.

Why are you saying a link to Learn You Some Erlang for Great Good [1] is a dead end? Have you missed the "Read it online" button?

[1] http://www.learnyousomeerlang.com

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't Erlang more popular?

#135

Post by mpd »

There's a lot that I like about Erlang the language, but using it in production left a sour taste in my mouth due to difficult-to-find documentation, difficulty in testing the code, and (especially) the misery that is mnesia.

It was a poor fit with our cloud-based infrastructure, and once the mnesia database began corrupting itself weekly, requiring a full rebuild, it was an easy decision to move to another solution for what we were using it for.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't Erlang more popular?

#137

Post by spullara »

doktrin wrote: post #106
asattarmd wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ffs, you're not looking at some small product that an unknown company built. You're looking at something that is really well-known. What does the website of Google convey? Do you really decide whether you'd learn a language by looking at its website? > "that the online reference doesn't cover interaction with anything outside of your program" This does NOT mean it does not teach you IO. The full bullet point is > "Ho…

> You're looking at something that is really well-known. What does the website of Google convey? The Google comparison is comical. You are wildly over-estimating how well known Erlang is, even in the dev community. > Do you really decide whether you'd learn a language by looking at its website? Most devs learn a new language when it helps them solve a problem. Anyone who needs to solve the problems that Erlang addres…

The last thing Erlang should put on its website to get new uses is Erlang source. Certainly the most off putting part of it.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't Erlang more popular?

#138

Post by Jtsummers »

prodigal_erik wrote: post #130

To me it sounds like Erlang's biggest departure from the mainstream is http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?LetItCrash , casually letting processes die and be recreated. When I put effort into actually using a niche language (as opposed to merely learning it for fun) I expect it to enable me to write software that's less embarrassingly defective than everyone else's, where Erlang only seeks to reduce the pain from my doing bad wor…

Let it crash isn't about having the program crash, it's about the processes. It's a vocabulary issue for a lot of people, however. In erlang your program consists of multiple concurrent processes (well, that's the intention at least). When an individual process fails (say it's a parser and has been given bad input), the erlang way is to fail and let the supervisor/spawner figure out the corrective action. It's the same question we face when writing in java/c#/etc languages with exception handling. Where do I catch the exception?

A search example. You have several search algorithms given your input. Run all in parallel, if they crash it's fine. If all crash then the search was a bust, but if one succeeds you terminate the remainder and have your answer.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't Erlang more popular?

#139

Post by Luc »

spoiler wrote: post #125
Luc wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the resources currently available for would-be Erlang adopters require an unrealistic level of interest and time to get them over the hump. The person who can't be bothered to even find 'Learn You Some Erlang' also won't have the motivation to learn Erlang. It does take effort, but there now are many good resources available (unlike the situation just a few years ago).

I believe you missed the point. When I first heard about Go, I went to the official website and I was immediately presented with a few code examples. The go tour was fascinatingly good introductory material. Furthermore, the documentation and language specification are very concise, clear and full of examples. What am I trying to say? Put effort into presenting your language and I will put effort into going through t…

No, I get the point, but I don't agree with it, at least not to that extent.

> Put effort into presenting your language and I will put effort into going through the material. Give me two shit and that's how much interest you will get from me.

See, I really don't think it's worth courting people who have that attitude. If your motivation is _that_ low, it's probably not for you anyway. At this point, even people who don't have a real need for Erlang/OTP, but who still enjoy learning for the sake of learning, can find great introductory material.

Post reply on HN