[erlang-questions] Why single-assignment with non-shared state?

Matej Kosik <>
Sat Oct 20 14:54:13 CEST 2007


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ulf Wiger wrote:
> While single assignment and pattern matching go very well
> together, it's a little bit less obvious how mutable state and
> pattern matching would combine as nicely. Erlang's current
> semantics for binding and matching make it quite straight-
> forward to reason about even very complex programming
> patterns.

Doesn't shadowing of meanings of variables in Erlang similarly complicate reasoning? (in one
position some variable has some meaning and elsewhere in the term suddenly has different meaning).

Non-functional features of Erlang are present in its fundamental constructs:
- - send
- - receive
- - spawn
These cannot be modelled in (purely) functional languages, can they? How?

> 
> BR,
> Ulf W
> 


Regards
- --
Matej Košík
ICQ: 300133844
skype: matej_kosik
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHGfp1L+CaXfJI/hgRAsz6AKDPh8of9p2ZjNcbdepLMGNYqDP+PwCfUwfq
oeKj320tszFHLxPXTG8Fzig=
=vv1n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the erlang-questions mailing list