[erlang-questions] some language changes

Bengt Kleberg bengt.kleberg@REDACTED
Mon May 28 09:13:28 CEST 2007

On 2007-05-26 00:56, Robert Virding wrote:
> Bengt Kleberg wrote:
>> if i understand you correctly then epp does not use the io module 
>> internally but have opened in raw mode. correct?
> Epp does use (or at least used to use when it was written) the io module 
> without any strangities.


>>> This has been discussed in an earlier thread, and various workarounds 
>>> have been presented. Mine was to
>>> make a ram_file_io_server, which I thought was trivially easy (after 
>>> some study of the file IO
>>> system).

if the epp module uses the normal io module i do not understand why ulf 
wiger suggest using a ram_file_io_server.

why do we need the ability to have files?
they are handled by the file module which gives us the io device.

i admit that currently epp needs a file, and thus a ram_file_io_server. 
but if a small change to epp (allowing an io device as well as a file) 
then any io server (that is correct :-) would be ok. that way we could 
have any storage, instead of only a file.

Those were the days...
    EPO guidelines 1978: "If the contribution to the known art resides
    solely in a computer program then the subject matter is not
    patentable in whatever manner it may be presented in the claims."

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list