|
|
| Author |
Message |
|
| wboeke at hzsbg01.nl.luce |
 Posted: Mon Feb 08, 1999 4:32 pm |
 |
|
|
Guest
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: W.Boeke, Lucent Technologies, boeke_at_lucent.com
To : Erlang discussion group, erlang-questions_at_erlang.org
Date: febr 8, 1999
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
Suppose I have a record:
-record(aap,{ johnnie }).
a function:
name() -> johnnie.
and a variable assignment:
Var = #aap{ johnnie=mad },
Now my question is: would it be TERRIBLE difficult to implement Erlang such
that I could address a record member as follows:
Var#aap.name()
This way, working with associative arrays would become very simple. And these
data structures are quite useful, once you are accustomed to them.
Kind regards,
Wouter Boeke
Post generated using Mail2Forum (http://m2f.sourceforge.net) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| tobbe at serc.rmit.edu.au |
| Posted: Tue Feb 09, 1999 1:03 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
> Now my question is: would it be TERRIBLE difficult to implement Erlang such
> that I could address a record member as follows:
Richard O'Keefe has come up with a much better solution
called "Abstract Patterns", which he presented at the
last Erlang User's Conference. You'll find his slides
at (in powerpoint):
http://www.erlang.se/onlinenews/New/Slides/Abstract_Pattern_Matching_for_Erlang.ppt
Basically, Abstract Patterns removes the need for records
and the Erlang preprocessor.
> This way, working with associative arrays would become very simple. And these
> data structures are quite useful, once you are accustomed to them.
Have you had a look at:
http://www.erlang.org/user.html#assoc-1.2
/Tobbe
Post generated using Mail2Forum (http://m2f.sourceforge.net) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| rv at erix.ericsson.se |
| Posted: Tue Feb 09, 1999 11:51 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
wboeke_at_hzsbg01.nl.lucent.com writes:
>Hi,
>
>Suppose I have a record:
>
> -record(aap,{ johnnie }).
>
>a function:
>
> name() -> johnnie.
>
>and a variable assignment:
>
> Var = #aap{ johnnie=mad },
>
>Now my question is: would it be TERRIBLE difficult to implement Erlang such
>that I could address a record member as follows:
>
> Var#aap.name()
>
>This way, working with associative arrays would become very simple. And these
>data structures are quite useful, once you are accustomed to them.
Basically what you are after is to be able to determine the field name
of a record at runtime. This was discussed when records were added
but we decided not to do it. It can be added if the desire is
overwhelming. :-)
The syntax would be with current priorities:
Var#aap.(name())
Definitely look ROK's abstract patterns which Torbj |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| tobbe at serc.rmit.edu.au |
| Posted: Tue Feb 09, 1999 12:03 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
| rv> Definitely look ROK's abstract patterns which Torbj |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
All times are GMT
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Digg It
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Facebook
Stumble Upon
Technorati
