<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8">
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.18.3">
</HEAD>
<BODY>
On Sun, 2008-07-27 at 22:15 +0200, attila.rajmund.nohl@ericsson.com wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<PRE>
> In most cases, when your Erlang code looks ugly, you do ugly think or you
> structure your code wrong way.
</PRE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<PRE>
</PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<PRE>
It's not ugly thinking - it's non-erlangish thinking. And in my opinion
it's a fault in a language if it constrains my thinking. It should be
the other way: the language should follow my thinking.
</PRE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
The practical upshot of this is that we should all program in a macro assembler because that provides the fewest constraints on your thinking.<BR>
<BR>
I'm more of the camp that a decent language guides your thinking by making desirable coding techniques easy and undesirable ones hard. This is where a lot of popular languages like C++ or Java fail, in my books: they claim one style of coding is desirable and then make that style of programming as hard as other styles of programming which they claim as undesirable and wonder why people don't do the Right Thing <tm>.<BR>
<BR>
<TABLE CELLSPACING="0" CELLPADDING="0" WIDTH="100%">
<TR>
<TD>
-- <BR>
<B>Michael T. Richter</B> <<A HREF="mailto:ttmrichter@gmail.com">ttmrichter@gmail.com</A>> (<B>GoogleTalk:</B> ttmrichter@gmail.com)<BR>
<I>The only reason some people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory. (Paul Fix)</I>
</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>
</BODY>
</HTML>