Extending Functionality: gen_server_ext

Jay Nelson <>
Fri Mar 21 14:45:19 CET 2003

At 11:22 AM 3/21/03 +0100, Vlad Dumitrescu (EAW) wrote:
>Maybe a better analogy than "objects" is "components". Use behaviours
>(as processes or as modules) as components, building stones for more
>advanced components and finally whole systems. This didn't work so
>well for OO components, but this doesn't mean the basic idea is

I like the term "composites".  It doesn't give any notion of
concreteness like objects or components, but it does convey
the same sense of "amalgam" that I was trying to describe.
I am trying hard to avoid being tainted by OO thinking because
I am struggling and think out loud about new ways of coding
because I have a new tool that has different features than my
old tools.

I am thinking in terms of combining processes.  You could
override in the process that binds behaviours, but it is more
reusable if you override by creating a new process (which
might delegate functions either via module delegation or via
process delegation) so that both versions are always available
as you move forward.


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list