[erlang-questions] Pmods, packages, Unicode source code and column numbers in compiler - what will happen in R16?

Jesper Louis Andersen <>
Fri Oct 19 10:53:41 CEST 2012

On Oct 18, 2012, at 8:42 PM, Richard Carlsson <> wrote:

> When I say "proper implementation", I simply mean a separate opaque datatype (much like funs) for module instances, and support throughout the ecosystem for tracing and debugging. Apart from that, I think the existing syntax and semantics of parameterized modules is not lacking anything (beyond some simple additions like static-declared functions). Could you be more exact with what you refer to by "functors", because that's a quite fuzzy concept. ML functors, for example, are very static in nature and are more akin to C++ templates in the way they are expanded at compile time. I certainly don't think that is desirable in a language like Erlang.

I would absolutely *love* having a way to do ML-style functors in Erlang. I would like to have them as a static system - but my history is probably haunting here. But, to do this you probably need first-class modules as well,
which is nice for a dynamic language.

Jesper Louis Andersen
  Erlang Solutions Ltd., Copenhagen

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list