[erlang-questions] The Beauty of Erlang Syntax

Ulf Wiger <>
Fri Feb 27 00:00:38 CET 2009


Zvi wrote:
> 
> Look for example at Ulf Wiger's plainfsm vs. gen_fsm . 
 > There is overlapping between plain Erlang and OTP.
 > The good thing, that there is only one OTP
> (i.e. no competing high-level frameworks for Erlang).

I'm reasonably familiar with Ulf Wiger's plain_fsm, but
I daresay I don't really get your point. I gather you
think reia is great, but for the rest of us, please
expand on how reia solves the plain_fsm problem better
(not having studied reia, I really have no idea.)

Yes, there is an overlap between Erlang and OTP. OTP
is Erlang-based middleware - how could there not be?

The point, if there was one, of plain_fsm, was rather
that the Erlang language has expressive power that you
partially have to give up in order to reap the benefits
of behaviours. I would guess that most middleware forces
similar tradeoffs.

And this:

 > {ok,Pid} = gen_server:start(my_mod,[],[]).
 > Res = gen_server:call(Pid, {my_fun, Args}).
 >
 >
 > compare this with Reia:
 >
 > Res = MyClass.MyMethod(Args)

is simply an apples and oranges comparison. You know
very well (since you love Erlang) that the convention
is to hide gen_server specifics behind a module API,
so the honest comparison would be

MyMod:MyFun(Args)

vs

MyClass.MyMethod(Args)

I fail to see how one is very low level, and the
other is not.

Congratulations on getting paid to do this, but apart
from that, what do you hope to accomplish?

BR,
Ulf W
-- 
Ulf Wiger
CTO, Erlang Training & Consulting Ltd
http://www.erlang-consulting.com



More information about the erlang-questions mailing list