jiffy

(bad acting) NIFs. Thankfully you can mark 'em as the dirty evil little things that they are (with negligible overhead): As a side issue, is there an easy method to determine if a NIF is problematic in this regard? I've used jiffy[0] in several codebases, but I keep reading these warnings and wondering whether I should be doing so. [0] https://github.com/davisp/jiffy

> One lesson I took from the first .com wave in the early 2000 was never to use a scripting language for application software again. A couple of things: Both Erlang and Python compile down to bytecode. Python compiles the first time you run a given script, Erlang won't execute Erlang source code; you must compile it to run it. As go1979 mentions, Erlang has HiPE, which compiles Erlang down to the host platform's native code. If you find that your program is spending a lot of time in the Erlang code in a given module, you can -at any time- recompile that module with HiPE and reload it with either a system restart, or the hot code reloading machinery. As an additional escape hatch, Erlang makes it rather easy to push performance-critical code out to a faster language -like C or C++ or whatever- and call that directly from Erlang. [0] Such c

"See their arguments against why Erlang shouldn't support JSON" Erlang supports JSON if you use a library[1], which is how pretty much every language other than javascript does it. Are you expecting native syntax or something? [1] https://github.com/davisp/jiffy

This sums it up: "No one on our team is an Erlang expert" Regarding mochijson we switched to jiffy [1] (NIF-based native C parser). Also I would love to get a comparison between 2-years old (probably badly written) Erlang server and a new Python/eventlet server. [1] https://github.com/davisp/jiffy