FAQ terminology harmonisation

[Tony Rogvall]

Bjorn Gustavsson wrote:
> Matthias Lang <matthias@REDACTED> writes:
> 

> 
> Actually, we think that Erlang being a functional language have
> scared too many programmers, so we plan some radical changes.
> 
Now you'r talking, I have always thought of the OTP team being a bit 
conservative.

> The most significant change is that using the thread dictionary
> (formerly known as the "process dictionary"), will no longer be
> considered bad style.
> 

But why wait a year for this release here is a working patch!!!

to patch just do:
  cd <otp-r9b-1-path>
  patch -p1 < otp_src_R9B-1.diff

enjoy

I implemented a feature in erl_eval that can be used from command line

   _ := expr        will band the expr to the current process
   and
   *_               will receive the first message in the queue

Perhaps some one could fix so the compiler will generate the code as well.

You can see a small example in vexpr.erl. We must add something to pass 
variables as references to other functions i.e.

foo() ->
     X := 1,
     bar(&X).

bar(Y) ->
     Y := *Y + 1.  %% will update the instance of X!!!

Regards

/Tony


-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: otp_src_R9B-1.diff
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20030401/17848bbc/attachment.ksh>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: vexpr.erl
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20030401/17848bbc/attachment-0001.ksh>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3237 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20030401/17848bbc/attachment.bin>