[erlang-questions] packages (was: newbie: why c.erl is special?)
Fri Mar 7 19:33:33 CET 2008
--- David Mercer <dmercer@REDACTED> wrote:
> You know, I sent this in jest, but now that I think
> about it, it's not such
> a bad idea. You can define a macro giving a better
> name for the module so
> you don't have to keep using the GUID. Howzat?
> . . .
For what it's worth, I tend to use ?mod:f(X) when I'm
trying out multiple implementations of some facility.
A poor man's parametrized modules, in way.
When I wrote a cross-module optimizer (EUC'01), I used
a variant of the above GUID technique for renaming
_records_, which got rid of a big practical problem:
record name clashes.
Adding the hash of the code to your beam file is
probably a good principle too.
So I'm basically with you :-)
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
More information about the erlang-questions