[erlang-questions] Maps & records: binding directly to bitstring comprehensions

Erik Søe Sørensen eriksoe@REDACTED
Fri Feb 7 22:38:41 CET 2014

Indeed - I've found that Erlang is great for writing small interpreters for
declarative specifications of domain logic. And a particularly good thing
about that approach is when you can have one specification but multiple
interpreters (encoder/decoder, evaluator/type checker, ...).
Den 07/02/2014 22.16 skrev "Jesper Louis Andersen" <

> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Felix Gallo <felixgallo@REDACTED> wrote:
>> Jesper, your instinct are correct as usual.  Unfortunately the protocol
>> designers live upstream in a different group over which I have no control,
>> and are incentivized to take the Facebook mantra of "move fast and break
>> things" to heart.
> One way would perhaps be to screw performance. Break the decoder into
> multiple small pieces and define an interpreter for the small pieces. Now,
> the definition is given by the input to the interpreter. It will be slow,
> but it will be easier to reconfigure. When things slow down, you can
> replace the interpreted variant with a faster code variant. The idea is
> that you only need to implement each new concept they cook up, but not each
> change.
> The basic idea is to have a grammar for the format and then employ a
> parser generator on the grammar. But you probably don't need the speed up
> front, only getting the definitions correct.
> --
> J.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140207/3f082140/attachment.htm>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list