←back to thread

Show HN: Visual flow-based programming for Erlang, inspired by Node-RED

(github.com)
199 points Towaway69 | 3 comments | 16 May 25 14:54 UTC | HN request time: 0.738s | source

Hi There,

Erlang-RED has been my project for the last couple of months and I would love to get some feedback from the HN community.

The idea is to take advantage of Erlangs message passing and low overhead processes to have true concurrency in Node-RED flows. Plus also to bring low-code visual flow-based programming to Erlang.

Show context
js4ever ◴[16 May 25 15:07 UTC] No.44006405[source]▶
Congratulations for the launch! Also I never heard of that license before:

"LICENSE - DON'T DO EVIL" https://github.com/gorenje/erlang-red?tab=License-1-ov-file#...

Also I recommend you to put screenshots higher in the readme and also provide real world use case instead of fully abstract examples

replies(5): >>44006503 #>>44006529 #>>44006630 #>>44006707 #>>44006970 #
1. pydry ◴[16 May 25 15:57 UTC] No.44006970[source]▶
It's a cool license in that it triggered Google enough to bar the use of jslint and led IBM's lawyers to seek out a special exemption to allow them and their customers to use JSON for evil.

No company's PR will ever tell you what the soul of a company is like but their lawyers will indirectly tell you everything.

replies(1): >>44007135 #
2. adastra22 ◴[16 May 25 16:11 UTC] No.44007135[source]▶
That’s a ridiculous take. The fact is “evil” is so ill defined that it would have been an unlimited liability. That’s a reflection of the world, not IBM.
replies(1): >>44008305 #
3. pydry ◴[16 May 25 18:11 UTC] No.44008305[source]▶
Plenty (in not most) legal cases hinge upon non specifically defined terms hence lot of lawyering is not "this is definitely legal/illegal" but "what's the risk of this going wrong if we face a jury?"

Companies take tens of thousands of legal risks every day and they single out particular risks over others to try and indemnify themselves because they think that risk is serious.

Theyre not going to admit that theyre worried that the company is evil enough to qualify under a reasonable person's interpretation but thats what theyre thinking.

It's the same with your employment contract. The level of nasty bullshit they put in there ("lawyers made us!") is probably the most accurate meter of how horrible (or not) the company will be towards you as an employer.