A Taste of Erlang, a Dynamic, Asynchronous Message-Passing Language
Sun Jul 2 23:25:45 CEST 2006
Ulf Wiger wrote:
> Den 2006-06-30 23:29:54 skrev Mickaël Rémond
> Curious, though, that he lists as a weakness the difficulty of doing a
> remote procedure call.
> I've personally never thought that rpc:call(Node,M,F,A) is particularly
> difficult to understand or use. Why, you don't even have to write
> marshalling code.
> "at the very least you should be able to wait for a
> specific message and then grab it from the message
> queue while still processing another message."
> Indeed, and this is particularly easy to do in Erlang, while quite
> difficult in, say, UML.
> What am I missing here?
I suppose he misses a built-in language construct to do rpc. Like
Joes !! proposal.
I miss !! too. To use a library call for such an important concept
does not feel right.
More information about the erlang-questions