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
>flawed.

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.

jay




More information about the erlang-questions mailing list