On 2012-01-21 19:35, Manu wrote:
On 21 January 2012 18:09, Sean Kelly <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:I suggest checking out Erlang messaging, as it's the basis for this design. Maybe then things will be a bit clearer. Are you suggesting that erlang is a common language that all programmers worth their paycheques are familiar with... and would also find intuitive? I don't know if it's the most sensible API decision to model a design off something so obscure, unless you suspect that D should appeal primary to ex-erlang users? Just to re-iterate, I'm not arguing against the API or it's merits, it's really cool, just that it shouldn't be the trivial one named receive(). That name should be reserved for the most conventional API.
Scala also uses a similar API as Erlang. -- /Jacob Carlborg
