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

Cameron Kerr <>
Mon Oct 22 00:52:55 CEST 2007


On 21/10/2007, at 10:47 PM, Matej Kosik wrote:

> I agree that fragments of code written in Erlang's functional  
> subset can be subject to
> proof-techniques (about program correctness) developed for  
> functional programs but what about the
> non-functional constructs? Have you developed some proof techniques  
> to cover also these constructs?
> Which? I am interested. (I do not mean crashes).

Concurrent models such as CSP could probably be applied to the  
concurrent parts of an Erlang program, though I have yet to read the  
CSP book.

-- 
• Cameron Kerr  • ✉  •
 •
• Telecommunications Teaching Fellow & SysAdmin •
• ✎ http://humbledown.org/blog/ • ✆ New: 027 7175 244 •

"Technological advances are not made by sadomasochistic, cultic, tool- 
worshipping pain freaks." – http://freeshells.ch/~revence/myths.txt





More information about the erlang-questions mailing list