Remember that Erlang was open-sourced as a last-ditch effort to save it, in 1998, after Ericsson internally switched to C++ and banned using Erlang on new products.
The sad fact is that the software industry as a whole relies heavily on mainstream languages, and not on educating your engineers to leverage the strengths of your specialty language. There's rationale to that, in that it costs a ton to maintain your own platform when you can just leverage a more public one. As a random example, why spend a ton to try and optimize your compiled language when you can... just use GCC (or clang nowadays). See: ongoing complaints about the performance of Go.
Erlang's silver lining is it found some measure of success outside of Ericsson, which led it to being unbanned there (and the banner to being "promoted sideways")
I truly asking, how much cost is this, have been measured?
I suspect is like the issue with fail to measure the whole thing and is just like "my guys that work in the platform also work making my apps and fixing my printer, so when they work in the platform I can`t print" kind of situation, instead of "I have a platform team (that could be like very small) and a apps team, and I ditch the printer in the bin" that I suspect is just reorg correctly the same amount of people.
> The sad fact is that the software industry as a whole relies heavily on mainstream languages, and not on educating your engineers to leverage the strengths of your specialty language.
> The sad fact is that the software industry as a whole relies heavily on mainstream languages, and not on educating your engineers to leverage the strengths of your specialty language.
Except when the language is the workhorse of a proprietary product sold to your employer. SQL is the example that escaped into the open world, but see also MATLAB and Excel formulae/VBA.
Remember that Erlang was open-sourced as a last-ditch effort to save it, in 1998, after Ericsson internally switched to C++ and banned using Erlang on new products.
The sad fact is that the software industry as a whole relies heavily on mainstream languages, and not on educating your engineers to leverage the strengths of your specialty language. There's rationale to that, in that it costs a ton to maintain your own platform when you can just leverage a more public one. As a random example, why spend a ton to try and optimize your compiled language when you can... just use GCC (or clang nowadays). See: ongoing complaints about the performance of Go.
Erlang's silver lining is it found some measure of success outside of Ericsson, which led it to being unbanned there (and the banner to being "promoted sideways")