[erlang-questions] Erlang 3000?
Sun Nov 16 13:57:56 CET 2008
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 11:33 PM, Zvi <exta7@REDACTED> wrote:
> This is the fastest way to start prototyping new stdlib, for the begining I
> propose to use new module names (i.e. for example gc_set instead set,
> gc_dict, instead dict , etc., where "gc_" perfix mean gen_collection), i.e.
> to not interfere with legacy code.
> I have 2 ideas here:
> 1. Maybe there is a reason from the beginning to have 2 collection
> behaviours, like in Python:
> a. gen_mapping (for dict, ets, dets, i.e. any key=>[value] mapping, maybe
> even funs)
> b. gen_sequence (for list, tuple, array, set, ordset, etc.). In some
> languages you may use index as a key - so maybe everything can be
I think that what defines sequence is an iterator protocol rather than
sequence module could then be a behavior AND a set of functions for
operating on iterators (map, fold, ets)
> 2. Use parametrized types, to specify ADT implementation details /
> For example in case of distributed/SMP map/fold , using something as plists
> "malt" (i.e. how to split tasks between cores/nodes or just use sequential
> code - this is just example).
Are parametrized types ready for prime-time? Like records,
they aren't exactly first-class members of the language, and reading
Richards paper on them, he has some concerns about performance.
> Damien Morton-2 wrote:
> > Can a module have multiple behaviours applied to it? What happens with
> > conflicts, can one function satisfy two or more behaviour requirements?
> I don't know
> View this message in context:
> Sent from the Erlang Questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> erlang-questions mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions