[erlang-questions] about the use of parametrized modules

Tim Watson <>
Sat Jan 15 18:03:28 CET 2011


> i'd simply would love not having the impression that some things
> cannot be discussed in this list. there's no need to express harsh
> feelings or absolute positions and, most of all, creativity and
> communities need new blood, open code, libraries, and support.
>

You're right of course - room for healthy discussion and debate is
important to any community and I don't think anyone here wants to
discourage that. For my part, I'm very impressed with frameworks like
misultin and mochiweb and have used both in production successfully
without any major issues or downtime! If the OTP team supported the
parameterised module feature fully, making sure to compensate for the
issues mentioned (such as shadowing variables) and a few others
(patching the cover and common_test tools to support them properly for
example) then this discussion would probably be one of coding style
rather than what is TTT (TM). Every application is going to have some
"global state" in one sense or another, so I think getting a clear
picture over whether this feature is going to be supported and
encouraged in the long term (or not) is what we really need. Or
perhaps alternative EEP suggestions about syntactic sugar for passing
state to and from callback modules.

Thanks for all your hard work on Misultin btw - whatever my opinion of
parameterised modules, I'm a very happy user!

Cheers,

Tim


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list