[erlang-questions] Ideas for a new Erlang

[Vlad Dumitrescu]

hi,

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Sven-Olof Nystr|m <svenolof@REDACTED>
wrote:

> Vlad Dumitrescu writes:
> > Regarding channels, there are several other paradigms that might be
>  > interesting to explore. One is the "process as stream processor" one,
> where
>  > processes work just like the UNIX toolkit programs by processing input
>  > messages and sending them forward. This allows piping of processes to
>  > compose functionality. With an appropriate syntax and machinery, the
>  > programmer need only specify the relevant functionality desired.
>
> I was going to explain how this could be easily implemented in Erlang
> but now I see that you have already done that :-) These are of course
> ancient ideas; the data flow languages are very similar. You might
> find the paper by Jack Dennis (referred to in my paper) worth reading.
>

Of course it's not a new idea. It's just that I didn't see before that the
data flow paradigm is so easily mappable onto Erlang.

I think that a simple framework like I described before is relatively easy
to implement. Probably the most difficult part would be the to decide a good
syntax :-) The really useful stuff is more complicated: flow control, fault
tolerance. Also, I suppose linear pipes are nice enough, but Hartmann
pipelines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartmann_pipeline) are even cooler!

So many ideas, so little time... :-)

best regards,
Vlad
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20080625/ea43d083/attachment.htm>