[erlang-questions] Are packaged modules the way to go ?
Sat Jan 3 16:09:54 CET 2009
This is a thread from when packaged modules was last(?) discussed on the
I belive it shows that the existing packaged modules are not a
sufficiently good idea to warrant official adaptation.
On Mon, 2008-12-29 at 03:14 +0100, cyril Romain wrote:
> This mail is about packaged modules (module with namespace), aimed to
> extend Erlang with structured module packages .
> You can find a quick introduction  and the packages module
> documentation .
> Using packaged modules or not has little impact on code but quite big
> impact on:
> - project file structure and naming
> - tools analyzing Erlang files or project file structure (such as
> debugger, dialyzer, Emakefile, etc.).
> - and consequently on package structure (I mean Erlang software
> packaging here, such as done by CEAN ).
> The support for packaged module has been introduced in Erlang/OTP before
> 2003 for evaluation purpose , but its adoption (or the intent of
> adoption) seems still unclear today.
> So my question is: for the sake of Erlang software consistency, should
> Erlang developers - be it core developers or developers using Erlang -
> adopt packaged modules ?
> Does it need improvement before official adoption ? Should packaged
> modules be ignored (or even removed from Erlang?) instead ?
> Best regards,
>  http://www.it.uu.se/research/publications/reports/2000-001/
>  http://www.erlang.se/publications/packages.html
>  http://erlang.org/doc/man/packages.html ; For some reason exported
> methods are not documented.
>  http://cean.process-one.net/
>  http://www.erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2003-April/008575.html
> erlang-questions mailing list
More information about the erlang-questions