Erland Paradign and OO paradigm!

[roger]

Hi, this is answered by the FAQ:

10.9.4. Erlang should be object oriented

People coming to Erlang from object-oriented languages sometimes spend 
a while trying to write programs in an object-oriented style in Erlang 
before "seeing the light" and giving up. Several papers have been 
published about how to "do OO in Erlang", including a chapter in the 
Erlang book.

A common conservative position is to say that processes, asynchronous 
messages, functions and modules provide the same ability to structure 
systems as do threads, classes, methods, inheritance and aggregation.

An aggressive position is to say that OO is just snake oil, that 
inheritance is error prone and that any system which doesn't model 
concurrent problems         with concurrency in the program is 
defective. Taking this position in newsgroups tends to trigger a 
flamewar.

This article is one of the highlights of such a flamewar (follow the 
thread to read the whole saga).


On Sunday, January 19, 2003, at 03:39 AM, Farzin_B23 SOORI wrote:

>
> Dear sir/mdm
> I am the VoIP project manager in ITMC Corporations in IRAN.
> i have been so interested in your Erlang platform for developing 
> application like Megaco.
> But i want to know if this platform is Functional based
> or Object Oriented based? Isn't it better to develope megaco 
> application with OO based scheme?
> I asked this question based on megaco nature , i think
> it can be developed with OO idea , what do you think?why?
> thank you
> sincerely
> Bastani
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* 
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 1904 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20030119/5e62bd1e/attachment.bin>