[erlang-questions] Why do we need modules at all?

[Joe Armstrong]

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Max Lapshin <max.lapshin@REDACTED> wrote:

> Very strange topic for me.
>
> I'd like to know if there will be hierarchial modules in Erlang,
> because tree of packages is a rather good idea:
>

No it's not - this has been the subject of long and heated discussion and is
why packages are NOT in Erlang - many people - myself included - dislike
the idea of hierarchical namespaces. The *dot* in the name has no semantics
it's just a separator. The name could equally well be encoders.mpg.erlyvideo
or mpg.applications.erlvideo.encoder - there is no logical way to organise
the
package name and it does not scale -


>
> erlyvideo.mpegts.encoder
> erlyvideo.rtp.encoder
>
> But plain module namespace is also ok. It would be impossible for me
> to work with 30K LOC with plain function namespace.
>

The English language has a flat namespace.

I'd like a drink.alcoholic.beer with my food.unhealthy.hamburger and my
food.unhealthy.national.french.fries

I have no problem with flat beer and chips.

/Joe







> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20110524/f3cf6550/attachment.htm>