[erlang-questions] process dictionary, anyone?
Tue Apr 24 10:54:34 CEST 2007
--- Mats Cronqvist <mats.cronqvist@REDACTED>
> Robert Virding wrote:
> > Trouble is that it breaks the functional part of
> the language. Now that
> > is only really done in process dictionary,
> processes/message, ports and
> > ets.
> so erlang is functional, except for the process
> dictionary, messages, ports
> and ets? then perhaps it's time to stop pretending
> it's functional?
Erlang also uses message passing, except for ets, dets
and mnesia. So let's just stop this sick pretense,
shall we? Erlang is really an imperative,
PS. And I for one welcome our new object-oriented
PPS. Maybe it wouldn't have been banned if we had
thought of this in the first place? Dang.
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
More information about the erlang-questions