[erlang-questions] Representation of a map in bytecode?

Hugh Perkins <>
Tue Sep 18 09:47:06 CEST 2007


On 9/18/07, David King <> wrote:
> > The evaluation order [of lists:map/1] is implementation dependent.
>

Ok so, in theory, so we dont care about side-effects in a parallelized map?

Still, probably better to enhance test repeatability by ensuring that
the side-effects generated are predictable on a per-implementation
basis?

Ermmm..... random question, if lists:map is implementation dependent,
I guess this means that, in standard erlang, the test results on one
architecture are not portable to other architectures?  Is this a good
thing?



More information about the erlang-questions mailing list