[erlang-questions] Visual Erlang notation v0.1.0 - feedback request

Vlad Dumitrescu vladdu55@REDACTED
Tue May 6 15:09:38 CEST 2014


On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Torben Hoffmann <
torben.hoffmann@REDACTED> wrote:

> It may come across as a bottom-up approach, but Jesper and I started out
> using OPM to
> describe Erlang Concurrency Patterns, which sort of worked, but then I was
> strongly
> advised to invent Visual Erlang by someone who had been down the OPM route
> with
> Erlang.
> So Visual Erlang is born out of a need to be able to express these
> concurrency
> patterns.
> I admit, that it is not something at scale, so there is a to-do on
> documenting
> something bigger before we reach v1.0.0.
> Right now I just want to close what to me is an obvious void on the
> architectural
> level and then take the next problem after that.

(just thinking out loud)

It appears to me from the discussion so far that such a high-level
architectural description of Erlang systems has two important usage
categories that are not quite overlapping:
A) describe and document existing systems and architectures
B) open up for new and better ways to architect and orchestrate Erlang

A involves among other things handling existing idioms (for example, when
using gen_servers it is most often true that one can equate a process with
a module, so it is reasonable to have a shortcut notation for that)

B would include support for protocols and structural patterns, for example.

Like it was noted before, it's probably difficult to have something that
works well for both cases. A layered approach might work: a low-level
notation that can handle anything, and a higher-level one that builds upon

best regards,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20140506/6dd86f98/attachment.htm>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list