Re: Support for non-unique process labels?

Stanislav Ledenev <[email protected]> writes:

>>>When one of the main languages rolls their own in the stdlib, it is one
> of many signals that adopting it in the core may be worth it.
>>>At the same time, I understand that the OTP team may not want the
> additional maintenance workload.
>
> Those claims without evidence look like manipulation.

As someone building a commercial project in Erlang, I can confirm that
doing anything production-ready in Erlang requires (re)writing a *ton*
of code which in other languages would be available in the standard
library. And do not even get me started on the tooling (or more
accurately lack thereof).

It is not a deal breaker, I can work around it and accept it because the
language itself is very good, but denying this reality is not
productive. This situation actively damages Erlang adoption.

-- 
Nicolas Martyanoff
http://snowsyn.net
[email protected]