A plea for help from Erlang gurus

[Vladimir Sekissov]

Good day,

taavi> It would be nice when end users themselves can add additional
taavi> rules/scripts.

There is something magic under the heaven.

Only few days ago I'd decided to write something like Minsky LGI
(Law Governed Interaction) for my system.
It seems you've got your notation from the same source.

I inform you if I get some progress.

Best Regards,
Vladimir Sekissov

Taavi Talvik <taavi@REDACTED> writes:
taavi> >
taavi> > > I have system, which tries to classify events based on
taavi> > > their properties. And I am trying to simplify writing
taavi> > > some special code for acting on property lists.
taavi> > >
taavi> > > I would like to write modules/rules in fashion of:
taavi> >
taavi> > How about using a record instead of an association list? If you don't
taavi> > have too many distict fields, this would be quite neat, and let you
taavi> > write code pretty much like you describe.
taavi> 
taavi> That's true. However there are too many fields. Or actually
taavi> fields, which I do not know beforehand. Fiew of them can be
taavi> standardised (ala event_source, time). But all of them cannot be
taavi> standardized.
taavi> 
taavi> Event from cisco router contains entirely different
taavi> properties, than event from xDSL or events from coffe machine. And
taavi> their classification is based on different rules. Maybe someone
taavi> wants special treatment of event based on customer address, someone
taavi> else wants classification based on time of day etc.
taavi> 
taavi> It would be nice when end users themselves can add additional
taavi> rules/scripts.
taavi> 
taavi> Erlang is almost perfect match with it's pattern matching, guard
taavi> tests and simple enough syntax.
taavi> 
taavi> best regards,
taavi> taavi
taavi>