[erlang-questions] some language changes

[Eric Merritt]

I agree with most of these. Why not write up EEPs for these.

On 5/21/07, beepblip@REDACTED <beepblip@REDACTED> wrote:
>
> good stuff
>
>
> On 5/21/07, Joe Armstrong <erlang@REDACTED> wrote:
> >
> > 2. Hashmaps (aka associative arrays)
>
>
> Yes! This would be a great addition.
>
>
> > 3. Extended string syntax: idea - put an atom *before the string quote
> >    to say what the string means and to *change* the syntax rules that
> apply
> >    to the string content.
> >
> >     X = C "......"
> >          C = a control atom
> >
> >       X = regexp " ... "
> >
> >          = html " .... "
> >
> >         Then we could write regexps and LaTeX inside strings without
> >         all the horrible additional quotes
>
>
>
> How about this as well. Allow us to declare a list as a string with some
> metadata
> on the listobject. I don't mind the linked-list structure. I just want an
> easy
> way for an RPC system to know the difference when communicating with
> some other language or data representation (aka JSON, Ruby, Python, ...).
> All the implementations
> that try to distinguish between a string and a list have clumsy techniques.
>
> Something using a literal like:
>
> S = "some string here"
>
> Would set that bit.. and
>
> Ah, but these are just cells. How could that be done? Mark all the cells.
> Have new
> constructors for binary to string conversion. Of course we would need that
> is_string() function as well.
>
>
> BTW, thanks for opening this up for discussion.
>
> cheers!
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
>