[erlang-questions] Good Erlang style?

Liam Clarke <>
Sun Sep 17 15:51:26 CEST 2006


Thank you for the reassurances. :-)

I've felt a bit daunted as I've dabbled into FP languages - it seems
to be a field where a lot of academic research occurs (perhaps due to
the lack of side effects?) and as I've had no CS formal education
(yet) I sometimes have trouble following what's happening in some of
the papers I read; ACM papers are a prime example.

Having had a quick skim, Mr Armstrong's thesis does indeed look quite
approachable, so I'll print it out tomorrow for perusal on my daily
commute.

Thanks again,

Liam Clarke

On 9/17/06, Robert Virding <> wrote:
> It is a very readable thesis and definitely not one to be scared of. :-)
>
> Robert
>
> Liam Clarke wrote:
> > Thank you, will do... admittedly, the word thesis scares me a little,
> > but I'll give it a shot.
> >
> >
> > On 9/17/06, Christian S <> wrote:
> >
> >>I suggest you look at section 4.3 "Error handling philosophy" and
> >>forward from Joe Armstrong's Ph.D. thesis: "Making reliable
> >>distributed systems in the presence of sodware errors"
> >>
> >>You can find the pdf at:
> >>http://www.sics.se/~joe/index.html
> >>
> >>Actually, read the whole thesis.
> >>
> >>On 9/17/06, Liam Clarke <> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Hi all,
> >>>
> >>>A quick question. From my Python background I'm mindful of a implied
> >>>"right way" of doing things, and I'm wondering about the Zen of
> >>>Erlang, as it were.
> >>>
> >>>Just contemplating error conditions currently. Is the use of catch and
> >>>throw the usual style, or is evaluation of returned values?
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > erlang-questions mailing list
> > 
> > http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> >
>



More information about the erlang-questions mailing list