[erlang-questions] Binary string literal syntax

Lukas Larsson lukas@REDACTED
Mon Jun 11 18:47:43 CEST 2018


Great discussion and ideas here!

One thing that I've not seen mentioned is; what if the list representation
was made more memory efficient? Today its 16 bytes per codepoint vs
binaries that are 1-4 byte per codepoint. What if lists only used 8 bytes
for each codepoint? what if it used the same as binaries? How would that
change this discussion?

On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 10:22 AM, Sean Hinde <sean.hinde@REDACTED> wrote:

> Would an EEP help the existing work of the OTP team in this area or is
> there already a clear plan and this would be a distraction?
There is no plan about what should be done in this area. We want to
continue developing the possibility to encode and decode protocols. We've
had numerous discussions about how we would like to extent the binary
syntax (or the syntax in general) in order to make it better for both
novice and advanced users of Erlang, but have yet to come up with something
that we like. So far our discussions have been mostly about decoding
protocols, because we see that as the larger pain point, but maybe we were
wrong about that?

Regarding creating a new text type, I'm personally skeptical, but haven't
formed a strong opinion on the matter yet. Adding a new type is a huge
undertaking and we should be very sure that what we want before doing it.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20180611/44479f01/attachment.htm>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list