Erlang article #1 on programming.reddit.com

[Matthew O'Gorman]

I think ryan was suggesting don't change erlang to suit the throng of
people coming to it.

mog

On 8/17/06, Rick Pettit <rpettit@REDACTED> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 11:30:19AM -0700, Ryan Rawson wrote:
> > Surely you jest?
> >
> > You'd have to break Erlang to insert loops.  First off you'd have
> > variables that need to be changed.  That substantiably breaks Erlang
> > imho.
>
> Not sure I understand you here. I have recently been using Joe Armstrong's
> robust TCP server, for example, and in that there is the notion of a
> "controller" loop for synchronizing operations among multiple socket handlers.
>
> For "simple servers" (i.e. those not requiring a behaviour like gen_server)
> I see tail-recursive server loop constructs all the time.
>
> Single assignment isn't a problem considering each new iteration through the
> loop allows for new local variable bindings, etc.
>
> > If you want to loop, you probably want to map or fold.  If you need to
> > loop you might want to use gen_server instead, or at the last resort
> > use a tail recursive call.
>
> What do you think goes on behind the scenes in a map, fold, or even gen_server?
>
> You might be surprised to find that there is a server loop in a gen_server
> (it is what passes the state to gen_server callbacks, and it is what the
> gen_server callbacks return the state to).
>
> Perhaps I misunderstand you.
>
> -Rick
>
> > On 8/17/06, Joel Reymont <joelr1@REDACTED> wrote:
> > >
> > >On Aug 17, 2006, at 5:53 PM, Ryan Rawson wrote:
> > >
> > >> I beg of all of you - no for loops.  No looping of any kind!
> > >
> > >What's wrong with looping?
> > >
> > >--
> > >http://wagerlabs.com/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>