Will parameterized modules become an official part of Erlang?

Steve Davis <>
Sat Feb 20 23:32:07 CET 2010


Hi Tuncer,

Yep, I have read that paper. I think that was where I first learned
how to use parameterized modules.

I'm just saying that in practice, I am personally using them less and
less.

regs,
/s

On Feb 20, 9:14 am, Tuncer Ayaz <> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Steve Davis
>
>
>
>
>
> <> wrote:
> > Hi David,
>
> > Most of the parameterized modules I have written have evolved in my code to
> > become un-parameterized modules; either by evolving into standard functional
> > modules where the additional arguments are passed in, or gen_servers where
> > the state is maintained in the process. In these cases, my experience of
> > having parameterized modules in my code has convinced me to remove them as
> > the application codebase matured.
>
> > The few remaining parameterized modules that I use also use the process
> > dictionary in addition and so are side-effect monsters waiting to happen. I
> > currently expect that these remaining parameterized modules will also
> > disappear in due course into gen_server processes.
>
> > As a result of this experience, my opinion on parameterized modules is that
> > currently that I really shouldn't use them and that, in the end, my code is
> > probably better off without them.
>
> Richard's paperhttp://www.erlang.se/workshop/2003/paper/p29-carlsson.pdf
> reveals the rationale behind param'ed modules.
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
> Seehttp://www.erlang.org/faq.html
> To unsubscribe; mailto:


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list