[erlang-questions] Package Support/Use
Ulf Wiger (TN/EAB)
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
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...)
More information about the erlang-questions