[erlang-questions] Design patterns?

Judson Lester nyarly@REDACTED
Tue Mar 3 18:44:47 CET 2015

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 12:30 AM Gordon Guthrie <gguthrie@REDACTED> wrote:

> Generally function heads are 'better' than cases, particularly if there
> are a lot of them...
> This email would be easier to answer if there was some code so people
> could outline options...

I deliberately didn't include any code because I was more interested in
talking about the overall idea ("do erlangers discuss design patterns?")
than "it'd be better if you..." As is it seems like including examples
without code was too much of a distraction :)

I think I was coming to the (general?) conclusion about case statements:
they're an intermediary step that are only occasionally left as-is.

I think I'm also slowly understanding how powerful (and therefore
important) the tooling is in Erlang - I'd figured out common_test on my
own, and been integrating that with eunit slowly. But dialyzer is an
amazing tool, and it seems like I should sink the time into learning xref,
too. Together, they seem to influence the design and structure of Erlang in
many little ways.

The question remains though: do erlangers discuss design patterns? (I see a
lot of "I'd do it this way..." which seems like sort of the same thing.)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20150303/a7e08550/attachment.htm>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list