Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> - There are many functional programming languages. (Haskell, OCaml, 
> Clean, and for some reason people keep calling Lisp "functional" too.) 

  Why did you not mention Lisp? It's the first, and still considered by
many to be *The* functional language.

> However, Erlang is *the only* one that could be considered "commercially 
> successful", as far as I can tell.

  How about Lisp?

> Suffice it to say, from what little I could discover, I didn't like what 
> I was seeing. Like most commercially successful languages, Erlang is 
> obtuse, complex, ugly and kludgy. Much like C, Java or anything else 
> wildly popular.

  Can you name a programming language that isn't? (Besides Lisp.)

  And don't say "Haskell". I can understand a Java program much more
easily than a Haskell one. So much for obtuse, complex and ugly.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message