Wed Jul 18 22:19:06 CEST 2007
With the garbage collector of course! Sorry couldn't resist that. :-)
I am in no way a js guru. How fine are js objects? I know Erlang
processes are lightweight but are they lightweight enough? Would you get
problems with implicit/explicit sequentiality in js? Otherwise just keep
them in a table.
Still thinking about doing PHP, there are an awful lot of applications.
Someone asked earlier which versions we are thinking about. At this
stage I would say the latest version for which I can get a decent
description of the language and main libraries. It doesn't matter that
much until you get users who would actually want to use it.
David Mercer wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Mercer [mailto:dmercer@REDACTED]
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 09:40
> To: 'erlang-questions@REDACTED'
> Joe Armstrong wrote:
>> The difficulty of wring an interpretor seems mainly to do with getting
>> an accurate
>> parse tree of the js source into Erlang - the interpretor should be pretty
> So, for me, who is new to Erlang and thought about it on my drive home last
> Friday, is this the right approach to the implementation: have a separate
> process for each object and lexical environment. An object is then
> represented as a PID, and requests for properties and methods (which are
> which would return the appropriate value (which may also be an object/PID)
> or function. Nested lexical environments (e.g., with blocks, function
> blocks, and the global environment), therefore, can send forward a request
> to their higher level if the value is not found in their environment.
> Am I on the right track?
> erlang-questions mailing list
More information about the erlang-questions