Sun Jan 12 09:42:00 CET 2003
Thanks for your imput, lads. I think I'll conclude that
Erlang's implementation of records is a mess (a wart on
Erlang's bottom as Matthias puts it) and thus best avoided.
They must be a big embarrassment to Erlang. In fact, I
should think it would be a great service to the community
if records (in their current form) were phased out as soon
as possible. Call it an experiment that went horribly wrong.
Chris proposes that country (for example) be a real,
unique, opaque type that couldn't be confused with any
other type. I couldn't agree more; record is a type that
has specific subtypes. This is analogous to objects, which
are derived from an abstract base object. Clearly
implementable (efficiently and safely) without use of
I'm disheartened now, but I do remain hopeful of soon-to-be
More information about the erlang-questions