On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Laurens Van Houtven <lvh@laurensvh.be>wrote:
One is a language. The other is an event loop. I'm not sure how we are supposed to compare the two. If he would've said E and Twisted, perhaps it'd be a more interesting comparison :-)
Also, what Steve said jumped right into my eye as well. Don't get me wrong. I like Erlang -- it's functional, it's robust, it's very easy to make your programs execute in parallel. RabbitMQ and Scalaris are two examples of *excellent* Erlang software. I don't really think Erlang was a bad choice -- I just think they don't know enough about Twisted to judge :-)
Laurens
_______________________________________________ Twisted-Python mailing list Twisted-Python@twistedmatrix.com http://twistedmatrix.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/twisted-python
actually one is a Concurrent Virtual Machine and language and Applications Framework (OTP) the other is a single threaded event loop library. Apples and Oranges. I have written production level code at a major ISP using Twisted. It became very painful once we started getting CPU bound on 32 core CPU machines. We had to run multiple instances of our Twisted server implementation to saturate the machine. I have since "ported" the same application to Erlang/OTP. It is about 1/5 the amount of code. And it scales 1:1 horizontally (adding more CPUs local or remote ) and vertically (adding FASTER cpus ) with no code changes. The broad statement that Twisted doesn't possess the capabilities of Erlang/OTP is pretty much accurate. Each solves a different problem. Granted Erlang/OTP is definately a super-set of what Twisted does -- Jarrod Roberson 678.551.2852