[erlang-questions] List to proplist?
Fri Oct 31 13:37:40 CET 2008
> ... cheatshit ...
Oops, this is a neologism I invented. I mean cheatsheet :-)
Anyway, I think language design can't be done incrementally.
Look at Erlang stdlib:
It follows the pattern of "maximum surprise" :-)
All the issues of:
* list/tuple/binary/etc. comprehensions
* parallel comprehensions (i.e. something like [X+Y || X<-Xs ; Y<- Ys] )
* real sequences (unlike lists:seq)
* new collection types
* built-in string type
* built-in matrix/vector of floats type
* implicit data-parallel constructs
All these and other issues should be considered together, incremental
changes to the language, only leading to Balkanization of the language (same
as with libraries in Nick's blog post).
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/List-to-proplist--tp20063268p20265061.html
Sent from the Erlang Questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More information about the erlang-questions