New EEP draft: Pinning operator ^ in patterns

Richard Carlsson carlsson.richard@REDACTED
Fri Jan 29 09:18:41 CET 2021

Den tors 28 jan. 2021 kl 11:02 skrev Nicolas Martyanoff <khaelin@REDACTED>:

> I am not representing anyone and never pretended so. But I'm not the only
> one
> noticing how something which was supposed to be an innocent proposition
> turned
> out to be the beginning of a roadmap from another company you worked for
> as a
> consultant.

There isn't a roadmap. We had one for the direction of the project, and it
explored some possible ways to evolve the language. On that path, we found
some things that we think could be good for Erlang regardless of what
direction you want to go. That's all we're trying to offer here. If we'd
found a road to a specific destination where we wanted to be, then trust me
that we would have been forthcoming about that.

If you had started transparently about how you and people at WhatsApp were
> hoping to drive changes to the Erlang language, starting with a new
> operator/annotation, you would have received very different responses.

Would I have? Any suggested change needs to stand on its own merits,
because there can be no guarantee that anyone will continue to build on it.
An EEP can explain which further developments are made possible by a
certain change, but that does not mean that any of them will happen, only
that there would be a new opening for experimentation.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list