[erlang-questions] (Non)Parametrized modules, inheritance, and R15B02 issues?

[Tomas Morstein]

> Given that the underlying mechanism stays, and only the syntactical
> conveniences are under threat: to what extent can the current pmod
> handling be replaced by / emulated with a parse_transform?

I think this is exactly what Ulf meant by the code presented on Github.
We also do some transforms in our database project, so we can do one
more new easily, but it has some limitations.

> If it's possible to do it that way, that might provide the best of
> two worlds: the existence of the pmod feature without having the
> maintenance burden in the compiler.

It's just a few minutes I was remsh-connected to a live system and did
some manual data updates of our data objects (based on pmods).
AFAIK, this wouldn't be possible with transforms, so transforms
are only partial solution, if we'll simply omit their other disadvantages.


I'd wait for what OTP team is going to publish within the upcoming week..