[erlang-questions] eep-0012 (Extensions to comprehensions)
Mon Aug 18 10:36:50 CEST 2008
2008/8/8 David Mercer <>
> I note, however, to my chagrin, that Erlang isn't alone in not adopting a
> more LISP-like syntax (cf. C, Java, Algol, PL/I, Ada, Pascal, Basic, Perl,
> etc. etc.). Should it? Bit late now, and much as it bugs me, I'm still
> going to write my Erlang in Erlang rather than LFE. At least Erlang offers
> an alternative syntax, though I don't know whether you would characterize
> as being production-ready yet.
It's production-ready in the sense that there are no (known) bugs in it and
that you can do everything you need to be attuned to vanilla Erlang and
coexist seemlessly with it. Most of the lisp features you would want are
there as well. What is needed is to fix a few design decisions on the lisp
Next version hopefully.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions