Various (and almost completely unrelated) questions and opinions

David Gould davidg@REDACTED
Mon Feb 19 23:53:29 CET 2001

On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 12:58:58AM -0600, Chris Pressey wrote:
> Speaking of which, if comma roughly means "and" and semicolon roughly
> means "or" then the following would make sense to me but is not
> considered legal by the compiler:
>   fib(1; 2) -> 1; fib(N) when N > 2 -> fib(N-1) + fib(N-2).
> That may be too risque as well.  Partly what I'd like to see is a sort
> of "Dangerous Erlang" which trades off some of the safety and
> predictability for flexibility and expressivity.  Is there any other
> programming language out there which claims to be a descendant of
> Erlang, or lists Erlang as one of its influences?  (Barring anything
> that claims it's a direct "subset" or "superset" or "extended subset" of
> Erlang)

Hmmm, I am thinking, "typeless Haskell" ;-)


David Gould                davidg@REDACTED               510 536 1443
If simplicity worked, the world would be overrun with insects.

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list