[erlang-questions] Erlang 3000?

damien morton <>
Sun Nov 16 18:25:05 CET 2008


2008/11/17 Robert Virding <>

>
> Syntax is another problem, maybe practically even more difficult, but in
> one respect actually not too difficult. The main point is that the syntax
> and the semantics must "fit together" and support each other. This is one
> reason why I am not too keen on using a C/Java like syntax, it was designed
> for completely different semantics.
>
> More thoughts later,


Another correspondent pointed out that the scope of the changes in Perl 6 is
provoking Shock and Awe is some of Perl community - the changes are so
extensive that the language is barely recognisable.

On the other hand, you would be hard pressed to look at Python code and tell
Python 3.0 from Python 2.0 by the syntax alone.

In my opinion, any changes to the syntax should be very small, so small that
Erlang programmers will be completely comfortable and familiar with
next(Erlang). At the same time, there are minor changes that can be made
which will make programmers from elsewhere also comfortable.

My personal favourite would be an optional indentation mode, as done with
F#, giving Python/Haskell style indentation sensitive coding. Wulf Wiger has
already got a prototype here
http://ulf.wiger.net/weblog/2008/06/11/indentation-sensitive-erlang-3/

---------------------
next(Erlang) -> Make proposals and Vote on them here:
http://moderator.appspot.com/#16/e=bbc4
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20081117/f6fefaf3/attachment.html>


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list