[erlang-questions] ML shaped language for the Erlang VM

[Jeremy Pierre]

Apologies for the lack of quoted content here, just switched off digest
mode.

I don't have particularly strong opinions on the name of the language
beyond simplicity/straightforwardness to be honest.  Mostly I've just been
saying the letters individually or "ML Flavoured Erlang".  I don't really
like "BeaML" but "BML" is fine and has the virtue of shorter file
extensions.  I'll give it some thought, a few others have suggested
different names off-list as well and I've heard from a few people now that
they expected something closer to standard ML given the naming :)

With respect to contributions, I'm really fine with most any help,
especially around finding the almost-certain-legion-of-bugs in the type
inferencer.  I'm planning on tackling maps and binaries in the very near
term and I'm curious to hear thoughts on eunit-like testing facilities.  I
haven't thought about it a lot beyond something like:

<pre><code>
module example

export add/2

add x y = x + y

test add with
  "An add test"
  maybe_some_fixture_fun
  [list, of, tests]]
</pre></code>

But that might be terrible for reasons not immediately obvious to me.
Other low hanging fruit includes stuff like adding annotations in the code
generator (e.g. line numbers) and filling in useful/missing BIFs.  Near to
medium term things I have more particular thoughts on are type annotations
and code formatters I'll write blog posts about.  If there are any emacs
wizards around, I certainly wouldn't say no to a major mode and I'm game to
debate most ;)

Jeremy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20160629/c47eb87b/attachment.htm>