[erlang-questions] Ideas for a new Erlang

[Mats Cronqvist]

Sven-Olof Nystr|m wrote:
> Mats Cronqvist writes:
>  > > Selective receive is complex and unnecessary.
>  > >   
>  >   over the years i've worked with perhaps 300 erlang programmers,  
>  > pretty much all of which have been less accomplished computer scientists 
>  > than Sven-Olof. and there are many things in Erlang that they've found 
>  > complex, unnecessary, or both. the syntax, higher order functions, list 
>  > comprehensions, recursion, bignums... pretty much everything in Erlang/OTP.
>  >   everything, that is, except two things; selective receive and hot code 
>  > loading. i can't think of anyone that has found these two things complex 
>  > and unnecessary.  
>
> I guess we'll have to differ on that point.
>
> I've met many people, who even after having quite a bit of experience
> with Erlang had trouble answering simple questions such as: if a
> receive matches many patterns, say
>
> receive 
>     {foo, X} -> ... ;
>     {bar, Y} -> ...
> end
>
> and there are messages in the mailbox matching both patterns, which
> clause and which message is selected? 

  so selective receive is complex, because you've met people who cannot 
immediately answer trivia questions about it? sounds pretty weak.
  let me suggest that the people you refer to simply used receive, and 
since it did what they expected, they never had to look up the 
description of the semantics. that is, it is the opposite of complex.

>  >  now Sven-Olof is obviously entitled to his opinion 
>
> thanks :-)
  ...even when it's wrong.

  what i don't understand is why you spend all this energy trying to 
change the language in this way. there are already lots of languages 
that are easy to reason about and has no users...

  mats