Guards and side effects
Sat Mar 12 13:40:00 CET 2005
Den 2005-03-12 12:16:37 skrev <>:
> Looking through the erlanguage mailing archive, much friday afternoon
> talk about language change, but seldom backed by a proof-of-concept
> implementation. Should not the burden be on the person proposing the
> changes to put in some work and present evidence, rather than demanding
> that others show reason why change is not worth implementing?
A nice example of this is Joe Armstrong's "bang-bang", i.e. the
!! notation for a synchronous process interaction.
Not only did he implement the language feature -- he wrote
a GUI framework with lots of example code using it.
Not that it was adopted anyway, but a nice example of
someone actually walking the talk it was. (:
More information about the erlang-questions