[erlang-questions] Parameterized module idioms

[Garrett Smith]

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Mark Fine <mark.fine@REDACTED> wrote:
> Is there a cleaner, more idiomatic way to use object-like parameterized
> modules:
>
> -module(echo, [PID]).
> -behaviour(gen_server).
> -export([start_link/0, echo/1]).
> -export([init/1, handle_call/3, handle_cast/2, handle_info/2, terminate/2,
> code_change/3]).
>
> start_link() ->
>    case gen_server:start_link(?MODULE:new(undefined), [], []) of
>        {ok, Pid} ->
>            {ok, ?MODULE:new(Pid)};
>        Else ->
>            Else
>    end.
>
> echo(What) ->
>    gen_server:call(PID, {echo, What}).
>
> handle_call({echo, What}, _From, State) ->
>    {reply, What, State}.
>
> init([]) -> {ok, []}.
> handle_cast(_Msg, _State) -> undefined.
> handle_info(_Info, _State) -> undefined.
> terminate(_Reason, _State) -> undefined.
> code_change(_OldVsn, _State, _Extra) -> undefined.
>
> 17> {ok, E} = (echo:new(undefined)):start_link().
> {ok,{echo,<0.82.0>}}
> 18> E:echo("hello, world").
> "hello, world"
> 19>
>

I realize there are some fans of parameterized modules. I'm wondering
though if this:

  E:echo("hello")

provides enough payoff over this:

  echo(E, "hello")

to justify the effort.

I come from an OO background myself, but for whatever reason, the
second form doesn't bother me. It may be that it's so endemic in
Erlang that I've gotten used to it.

Garrett