Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I feel like the bit about OTP misses the point of OTP.

Erlang is not just about distributed computing (in fact, it never was; any affinity for distributed computing was more of a side-effect of Erlang's design). Rather, it's about fault-tolerance. Supervision trees and "let it crash" are the cornerstone of Erlang programming, and therefore by extension the cornerstone of Elixir programming.

Meanwhile, OTP applications build on this in a way that permits composability. It's kind of like microservices behind the scenes, bit they feel like a monolith; you build up your system from lots of different OTP applications that work together to provide a unified whole.

Elixir and Erlang web frameworks (Phoenix, Sugar, Chicago Boss (IIRC), etc.) already do a lot of this for you by kicking off various OTP dependencies; for example, your average Phoenix or Sugar application will in turn start Plug, Ecto, and various other OTP apps, and these will in turn spin up their own dependencies (like Cowboy and Postgrex, respectively).

Basically, it's not quite right to equate OTP to just distributed computing. OTP is at the heart and soul of the vast majority of software written for BEAM.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: