Meaningless Drivel is fun!*
The moose likes Threads and Synchronization and the fly likes Erlang-OTP Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login


Win a copy of OCA/OCP Java SE 7 Programmer I & II Study Guide this week in the OCPJP forum!
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Java » Threads and Synchronization
Bookmark "Erlang-OTP" Watch "Erlang-OTP" New topic
Author

Erlang-OTP

Arjun Shastry
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 13, 2003
Posts: 1874
Hi Authors,
Eralang/OTP is made for mainly telecom applications but very few telecom companies actually have implementaton of Erlang(i read about this in differet forum). I have als read that compared to C++, Erlang is better in terms of number of lines of code/and application crashes.
Is there is any reason why Erlang though in practice since 80s, not yet very dominant in Telecom domain?


MH
Richard Carlsson
author
Greenhorn

Joined: Nov 07, 2010
Posts: 9
It is probably still true that Erlang is not that widely used within the telecom industry in general (but it's also hard to get good statistics about this, since these companies don't like to tell anyone what they're using in their products). The reasons for not using it seem to be the usual: fear and doubt, Not Invented Here Syndrome, "we'll wait until everyone else is using it first", and so on. But there have been some experience stories from other telecom companies lately, though; for example, there was a presentation from Motorola at the Erlang User Conference yesterday.

I'd just like to point out that Erlang/OTP being "made for telecom applications" is not quite right. Telecom systems were definitely the initial use case, but at the same time, telecom systems are really all about communication and control. There is nothing anywhere in Erlang itself that says "telecom", but there is a whole lot that says "parallellism", "fault tolerance", "supervision", "hardware control", "communication", "low latency", "soft realtime", "always-on", etc. This fits a whole range of problems that pretty much everybody has to think about nowadays when computer networks are everywhere.
Eric Merritt
author
Greenhorn

Joined: Nov 08, 2010
Posts: 6
Let me back up Richard and say that Erlang is a general purpose language and in no way geared towards the telecom industry. I have been using Erlang for years and have never been involved in Telecom.

Erlang is a very good choice for a broad range of applications, it just so happens to have been born in the telecom industry.
Pradeep bhatt
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 27, 2002
Posts: 8919

[quote=Richard Carlsson]It is probably still true that Erlang is not that widely used within the telecom industry in general (but it's also hard to get good statistics about this, since these companies don't like to tell anyone what they're using in their products). The reasons for not using it seem to be the usual: fear and doubt, Not Invented Here Syndrome, "we'll wait until everyone else is using it first", and so on. But there have been some experience stories from other telecom companies lately, though; for example, there was a presentation from Motorola at the Erlang User Conference yesterday.

I'd just like to point out that Erlang/OTP being "made for telecom applications" is not quite right. Telecom systems were definitely the initial use case, but at the same time, telecom systems are really all about communication and control. There is nothing anywhere in Erlang itself that says "telecom", but there is a whole lot that says "parallellism", "fault tolerance", "supervision", "hardware control", "communication", "low latency", "soft realtime", "always-on", etc. This fits a whole range of problems that pretty much everybody has to think about nowadays when computer networks are everywhere.
[/quote]

From Arjun it looks Erlang existed for 30 years. Why people have not used it because " "we'll wait until everyone else is using it first" are passe ?
Eric Merritt
author
Greenhorn

Joined: Nov 08, 2010
Posts: 6
[quote=Pradeep bhatt][quote=Richard Carlsson]It is probably still true that Erlang is not that widely used within the telecom industry in general (but it's also hard to get good statistics about this, since these companies don't like to tell anyone what they're using in their products). The reasons for not using it seem to be the usual: fear and doubt, Not Invented Here Syndrome, "we'll wait until everyone else is using it first", and so on. But there have been some experience stories from other telecom companies lately, though; for example, there was a presentation from Motorola at the Erlang User Conference yesterday.

I'd just like to point out that Erlang/OTP being "made for telecom applications" is not quite right. Telecom systems were definitely the initial use case, but at the same time, telecom systems are really all about communication and control. There is nothing anywhere in Erlang itself that says "telecom", but there is a whole lot that says "parallellism", "fault tolerance", "supervision", "hardware control", "communication", "low latency", "soft realtime", "always-on", etc. This fits a whole range of problems that pretty much everybody has to think about nowadays when computer networks are everywhere.
[/quote]

From Arjun it looks Erlang existed for 30 years. Why people have not used it because " "we'll wait until everyone else is using it first" are passe ? [/quote]


I am not quite sure what question you are asking Pradeep. Is it the idea that Erlang has been around for awhile (25 years or so in its very earliest form, but more like 11 in the latest) and isn't a mainstream language that has you concerned?
Pradeep bhatt
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 27, 2002
Posts: 8919

Eric ,

yes , that is what I meant. Sorry for being clumsy.
Eric Merritt
author
Greenhorn

Joined: Nov 08, 2010
Posts: 6
Well I can't really explain it any more then any one else. This is the perennial question around languages, there are a very small number of main stream languages. Those languages tend to look very much like C and be very imperative.

Erlang is neither of those things, so that seems to mean that it has a poor chance of becoming mainstream. However, all that means is that its not mainstream. Erlang is a good language with a large number of great libraries, its well supported, has a very good community, has been used in production for many years and it lets you handle certain types of large scale problems very easily. Very few other languages can compare for those types of problems. That recommends it well to me. The fact that its not mainstream just gives those people that are using it a competitive advantage over those that are not.
Martin Logan
author
Greenhorn

Joined: Nov 04, 2010
Posts: 3
I first saw Ruby back in 99. It was this little known language that was semi-popular in Japan but it took many years and a "killer app" for it to take root here. Functional programming itself has been around for ages but has not received the kind of attention it is getting now at any point in it's earlier history. Time since invention or efficacy of the language seem only minor predictors of language adoption and overall success.
 
I agree. Here's the link: http://aspose.com/file-tools
 
subject: Erlang-OTP