[erlang-questions] Why do we need modules at all?
Tue May 24 16:50:34 CEST 2011
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Anthony Ramine <> wrote:
> Le 24 mai 2011 à 14:45, Joe Armstrong a écrit :
> > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Max Lapshin <>
> > 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
> > why packages are NOT in Erlang - many people - myself included - dislike
> > the idea of hierarchical namespaces. The *dot* in the name has no
> > it's just a separator. The name could equally well be
> > or mpg.applications.erlvideo.encoder - there is no logical way to
> organise the
> > package name and it does not scale -
> packages are NOT in Erlang? Then the related code should be removed because
> erl.lang.number:plus(1, 1) definitely works.
Yes - this is an experiment unapproved feature which could be removed at any
This is how we do things - we add experimental and undocumented features
and reserve the right to remove them at any time in the future. Packages are
officially documented and thus not officially supported.
> Also, I think the Haskell guys would disagree about packages not scaling.
> Anthony Ramine
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions