[antoaravinth]

I don't quite get this, you are saying Erlang is fault tolerant? I'm confused here because fault tolerance is something that the application using a particular language needs to make sure right? Sorry if I mistaken your statement.

[StreamBright]

Erlang and especially OTP "forces" you to follow a standard that usually results in highly reliable service powered by concise easy to read and maintain code.

[cmrdporcupine]

Erlang comes with a philosophy/style on error handling, and its libraries help a lot as well.

Here's a reasonable summary: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3760881/how-is-erlang-fa...

[nickpsecurity]

ferd did a great write-up on how Erlang approaches reliability:

https://ferd.ca/the-zen-of-erlang.html

It's more about assuming things will fail by default with good ways of handling it built-in at the language level. A lot of people also find its inventor's thesis enlightening. Here it is:

http://ftp.nsysu.edu.tw/FreeBSD/ports/distfiles/erlang/armst...

And for those concerned, there's also at least one project to write the native functions in a safer language to reduce their bugs a bit:

https://github.com/hansihe/Rustler

[bonesss]

A lot of these concepts have been carried forward to some popular frameworks and languages. Akka (or Akka.Net & Akkling), is a great example. Railway Oriented Programming (https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/rop/), has gained some traction in the .net sphere and, along with F#'s Result<'success, 'failure> type, emphasizes structured and exception-less error handling.

It may be a poor mans Erlang, but better than nothing ;)

[tyfon]

It's the whole ecosystem with Erlang, OTP (Open Telecom Platform) and how they work with supervisors and monitors etc.

Everything is built so that you can operate a telecom switch and never drop that emergency call.

Erlang (Ericson language) is not necessary, you can also program for this in Elixir, although personally I prefer Erlang.

[maqbool]

Look up the OTP Supervision trees