[erlang-questions] Abstract patterns & frames/proper records

Thomas Lindgren thomasl_erlang@REDACTED
Thu Feb 19 13:55:11 CET 2009

----- Original Message ----
> From: Gleb Peregud <gleber.p@REDACTED>
> To: Jachym Holecek <jachym.holecek@REDACTED>
> Cc: erlang-questions <erlang-questions@REDACTED>
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 12:02:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [erlang-questions] Abstract patterns & frames/proper records
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 13:46, Jachym Holecek
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:14:08 +0100, Vlad Dumitrescu 
> > wrote:
> >> What is the reason that Richard O'Keefe's abstract patterns proposal
> >> appears in the discussions quite often, but nothing is being done
> >> about it? If an EEP would be written about it, what would be missing
> >> in order to have it considered? Is it only the lack of an
> >> implementation, or are there problems with it that didn't surface yet?
> >>
> >> The same questions can also be asked about the frames, respectively
> >> the proper records proposals.
> >
> > I'm curious about this as well. What do OTP people think about the two
> > proposals?
> > Anybody happens to be working on proof-of-concept implementation?
> I second these questions. Is there any activity in these directions?

Do note that there have been many proposals by many people over the years, proposals that might or might not be currently useful, applicable, relevant, etc. I guess the live ones are being shepherded through the EEP thing.

Abstract patterns seem potentially interesting. For starters, I think a prototype might be suitable for undergrad thesis work by a good student. Evaluate implementation options, implement a prototype, describe the implementation, and/or evaluate usefulness for programmers (or that could be a second thesis). Perhaps OTP can sponsor a visitor? If abstract patterns work well in practice, it could then be the basis of an EEP with implementation.



More information about the erlang-questions mailing list