[erlang-questions] lists:reverse/1 as a built-in function

Richard A. O'Keefe ok@REDACTED
Wed Jan 17 05:38:17 CET 2007

Just because something is a core part of the language doesn't mean I
always want it.  I believe that 
(1) Infix and prefix operator syntax should simply be an alternative
    way of writing an ordinary function call, so that X+1 and '+'(X,1)
    should be exactly the same thing.
(2) There should be three mutually exclusive ways to make a function
    available for calling without a prefix:
    (a) define it in the module
    (b) explicitly import it from some module
    (c) obtain it from erlang: if neither (a) nor (b) applies.
    This means that adding new functions to erlang: cannot break working
    code because working code would have to do (a) or (b).
(3) Imitating Java and especially imitating Java's inside-out packages
    is a Bad Thing.

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list