Erlang first appeared year

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Erlang first appeared year

Dmitry Klionsky-2
Hi all,

Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlang_(programming_language)
states that Erlang
first appeared in 1986, which makes it "old" comparing to Java (1995)
and C# (2000).
The other day a manager said that some C++ devs mentioned that Erlang is
"an old language".
I replied that C++, which first appeared in 1985, is even older.

Today I was reading http://blog.erlang.org/beam-compiler-history/ and
realized that the year
1986 is misleading.

It seems to me, that both Java and C++ have their first public releases
as first appeared years
and NOT when their design was started. They both have history sections
mentioning that work on
them was started long before.

Shouldn't we consider OTP R1B in 1996 to be the first release?
This will make Erlang is younger than Java!

I don't propose to cheat, I propose to play the fair game.

Thank you

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Erlang first appeared year

lmdthel
Younger might not always be better...

Thomas
ons. 20. jun. 2018 kl. 11.34 skrev Dmitry Klionsky <[hidden email]>:
Hi all,

Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlang_(programming_language)
states that Erlang
first appeared in 1986, which makes it "old" comparing to Java (1995)
and C# (2000).
The other day a manager said that some C++ devs mentioned that Erlang is
"an old language".
I replied that C++, which first appeared in 1985, is even older.

Today I was reading http://blog.erlang.org/beam-compiler-history/ and
realized that the year
1986 is misleading.

It seems to me, that both Java and C++ have their first public releases
as first appeared years
and NOT when their design was started. They both have history sections
mentioning that work on
them was started long before.

Shouldn't we consider OTP R1B in 1996 to be the first release?
This will make Erlang is younger than Java!

I don't propose to cheat, I propose to play the fair game.

Thank you

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Erlang first appeared year

greim
Am 20.06.2018 um 11:42 schrieb Thomas Elsgaard:
> Younger might not always be better...

...I absolute agree.

Or lets say "surviving of the fittest" if we define the development of
programming languages as an evolutionary process.

worms and jellyfishes, sharks and crocodiles are still alive...dinosaurs
aren't!

Markus Greim




>
> Thomas
> ons. 20. jun. 2018 kl. 11.34 skrev Dmitry Klionsky
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>:
>
>     Hi all,
>
>     Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlang_(programming_language)
>     states that Erlang
>     first appeared in 1986, which makes it "old" comparing to Java (1995)
>     and C# (2000).
>     The other day a manager said that some C++ devs mentioned that
>     Erlang is
>     "an old language".
>     I replied that C++, which first appeared in 1985, is even older.
>
>     Today I was reading http://blog.erlang.org/beam-compiler-history/ and
>     realized that the year
>     1986 is misleading.
>
>     It seems to me, that both Java and C++ have their first public releases
>     as first appeared years
>     and NOT when their design was started. They both have history sections
>     mentioning that work on
>     them was started long before.
>
>     Shouldn't we consider OTP R1B in 1996 to be the first release?
>     This will make Erlang is younger than Java!
>
>     I don't propose to cheat, I propose to play the fair game.
>
>     Thank you
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     erlang-questions mailing list
>     [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>     http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Erlang first appeared year

Hugo Mills-2
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:35:18PM +0200, greim wrote:

> Am 20.06.2018 um 11:42 schrieb Thomas Elsgaard:
> >Younger might not always be better...
>
> ...I absolute agree.
>
> Or lets say "surviving of the fittest" if we define the development
> of programming languages as an evolutionary process.
>
> worms and jellyfishes, sharks and crocodiles are still
> alive...dinosaurs aren't!
   Well, we call them "birds" nowadays.

   Hugo.

> Markus Greim
>
>
>
>
> >
> >Thomas
> >ons. 20. jun. 2018 kl. 11.34 skrev Dmitry Klionsky
> ><[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>:
> >
> >    Hi all,
> >
> >    Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlang_(programming_language)
> >    states that Erlang
> >    first appeared in 1986, which makes it "old" comparing to Java (1995)
> >    and C# (2000).
> >    The other day a manager said that some C++ devs mentioned that
> >    Erlang is
> >    "an old language".
> >    I replied that C++, which first appeared in 1985, is even older.
> >
> >    Today I was reading http://blog.erlang.org/beam-compiler-history/ and
> >    realized that the year
> >    1986 is misleading.
> >
> >    It seems to me, that both Java and C++ have their first public releases
> >    as first appeared years
> >    and NOT when their design was started. They both have history sections
> >    mentioning that work on
> >    them was started long before.
> >
> >    Shouldn't we consider OTP R1B in 1996 to be the first release?
> >    This will make Erlang is younger than Java!
> >
> >    I don't propose to cheat, I propose to play the fair game.
> >
> >    Thank you
> >
> >    _______________________________________________
> >    erlang-questions mailing list
> >    [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
> >    http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >erlang-questions mailing list
> >[hidden email]
> >http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
--
Hugo Mills             | Alert status mauve ocelot: Slight chance of
hugo@... carfax.org.uk | brimstone. Be prepared to make a nice cup of tea.
http://carfax.org.uk/  |
PGP: E2AB1DE4          |

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

signature.asc (853 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Erlang first appeared year

Richard Carlsson-3
In reply to this post by Dmitry Klionsky-2
Yes, 1986 is a misleading date, because that is only when experimentation started. A better date would be late 1988 or 1989-1990, or even 1992-1993 depending on your point of reference.
Quoting from Joe Armstrong's paper 'A History of Erlang':
 - "By the end of 1988, most of the ideas in Erlang had stabilized."
 - "1989 also provided us with one of our first opportunities to present Erlang to the world outside Ericsson. This was when we presented a paper at the SETSS conference in Bournemouth."
 - "Later in the year, in December 1989, this resulted in Bjarne, Mike, Robert and me visiting Bellcore, where we gave our first ever external Erlang lecture."

But it was still only a very bare-bones Erlang back then, and it was implemented on top of Prolog, and had no real commercial use yet, only experimental within Ericsson.
The first efficient implementation, the JAM abstract machine, was created in 1990.
 - "One of the high points of 1990 was ISS’90 (International Switching Symposium), held in Stockholm. ISS’90 was the first occasion where we actively tried to market Erlang."
 - "In 1992, we got permission to publish a book and it was decided to commercialize Erlang. A contract was signed with Prentice Hall and the first Erlang book appeared in the bookshops in May 1993."

So we can definitely say that by 1993, Erlang was a full, stable real world language with a reliable and efficient implementation and publicly available documentation.

For comparison, C++ experimentation started in 1979 and the first book was published in 1985, while Perl was developed 1987-1991, Python started in 1989, Ruby was created in 1995-1996, and Java was developed in 1991-1996. Erlang is not "old".


        /Richard

2018-06-20 11:33 GMT+02:00 Dmitry Klionsky <[hidden email]>:
Hi all,

Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlang_(programming_language) states that Erlang
first appeared in 1986, which makes it "old" comparing to Java (1995) and C# (2000).
The other day a manager said that some C++ devs mentioned that Erlang is "an old language".
I replied that C++, which first appeared in 1985, is even older.

Today I was reading http://blog.erlang.org/beam-compiler-history/ and realized that the year
1986 is misleading.

It seems to me, that both Java and C++ have their first public releases as first appeared years
and NOT when their design was started. They both have history sections mentioning that work on
them was started long before.

Shouldn't we consider OTP R1B in 1996 to be the first release?
This will make Erlang is younger than Java!

I don't propose to cheat, I propose to play the fair game.

Thank you

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Erlang first appeared year

greim
In reply to this post by greim
Am 20.06.2018 um 12:41 schrieb Daron Ryan:
> Dinosaurs are extinct? Pascal / Delphi is still alive.

Delphi is for hipsters....I still use Borland Pascal 7.01 nearly daily
for a now 24 years running embedded project. A real world application
24/7/365...and even ERLANG (since 2 years).


  Maybe it requires
> something like a rock from outer space to hit the gulf of Mexico to draw
> the line (sorry I don't know whether the right word is asteroid or
> something else so I played it safe and said rock)

Who ceres about dying? Have you ever heard about reincarnation?
MISRA-C ......Pascal with curly brackets, how awful ;-)

but now we are running out of topic here..


Markus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MISRA_C


>
> On 20 Jun 2018 8:35 PM, "greim" <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Am 20.06.2018 um 11:42 schrieb Thomas Elsgaard:
>
>         Younger might not always be better...
>
>
>     ...I absolute agree.
>
>     Or lets say "surviving of the fittest" if we define the development
>     of programming languages as an evolutionary process.
>
>     worms and jellyfishes, sharks and crocodiles are still
>     alive...dinosaurs aren't!
>
>     Markus Greim
>
>
>
>
>
>         Thomas
>         ons. 20. jun. 2018 kl. 11.34 skrev Dmitry Klionsky
>         <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>         <mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>>:
>
>              Hi all,
>
>              Wikipedia
>         https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlang_(programming_language)
>         <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlang_(programming_language)>
>              states that Erlang
>              first appeared in 1986, which makes it "old" comparing to
>         Java (1995)
>              and C# (2000).
>              The other day a manager said that some C++ devs mentioned that
>              Erlang is
>              "an old language".
>              I replied that C++, which first appeared in 1985, is even
>         older.
>
>              Today I was reading
>         http://blog.erlang.org/beam-compiler-history/
>         <http://blog.erlang.org/beam-compiler-history/> and
>              realized that the year
>              1986 is misleading.
>
>              It seems to me, that both Java and C++ have their first
>         public releases
>              as first appeared years
>              and NOT when their design was started. They both have
>         history sections
>              mentioning that work on
>              them was started long before.
>
>              Shouldn't we consider OTP R1B in 1996 to be the first release?
>              This will make Erlang is younger than Java!
>
>              I don't propose to cheat, I propose to play the fair game.
>
>              Thank you
>
>              _______________________________________________
>              erlang-questions mailing list
>         [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>         <mailto:[hidden email]
>         <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>         http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>         <http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions>
>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         erlang-questions mailing list
>         [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>         http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>         <http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     erlang-questions mailing list
>     [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>     http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>     <http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions>
>

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions