[erlang-questions] Package Support/Use

Ulf Wiger (TN/EAB) ulf.wiger@REDACTED
Fri Nov 3 19:50:46 CET 2006

James Hague wrote:
> But obviously packages aren't going over all 
> that well or they'd be standard by now.

That could be the case, but it's sort of a 
chicken-and-egg problem too. Bengt obviously
likes packages, but doesn't use them because 
it's an experimental feature. 

Obviously, a many people aren't even aware 
of the existence of packages, since they aren't
documented (at least not in the OTP documentation.)

Also, we don't have a terrible namespace problem
in Erlang, partly because not that many people
develop reusable components in Erlang ... yet. (:

It could be argued that we should deal with the 
problem once it's obviously a problem. OTOH, when
it's obviously a problem, changing the language is
also obviously going to be more difficult than it
is today.

ROK's 'flotilla' concept also hasn't been adopted.
Does that mean it's obviuosly a bad idea? What about
abstract patterns, or structs? They've certainly been
debated long enough, but are still not in the 
language. Does that mean they shouldn't be?

(I have to practice writing 'obviously', because I
mistype it every time...)

Ulf W

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list