Erlang standard library quirks

[Richard Carlsson]

Dominic Williams wrote:
> I might be interested (I care a lot about good, consistent naming and
> very much prefer the error handling approach you outlined)... the
> only problem is that I am completely opposed to the use of packages.

I know many people don't like to use packages. However, it's hard to
add new standard modules without causing collisions with existing
code out there. Unless, of course, all the new modules are given
some (short) pseudo-unique prefix. Personally, I think prefixes are
rather ugly, but I also don't want to force anyone to use packages.
But we could have both - each function could have a package version
as well as a flat-namespace-with-prefixes version. It would be easy
to generate one given the other.

	/Richard

-- 
 "Having users is like optimization: the wise course is to delay it."
   -- Paul Graham