[erlisp-devel] name(s) for link function

[Eric Lavigne]

> > I propose that (link pid) be used to indicate that *current-process*
> > be notified when process pid terminates. I imagine that this is the
> > more common case. A process needs to know about an event, so it
> > requests notification.
> 
> > The other direction (reverse-link pid) would mean that
> > *current-process* should send notification to process pid when
> > *current-process* terminates.
> 
> In this case I would make the API
> (link :to pid)
> (link :from pid)
> (link :to-from pid)

I like the idea, but it is not clear to me which direction :from and
:to refer to. Which one matches my "link" and which matches
"reverse-link"? Which one says "please notify me when you terminate"?
Which one says "I will notify you when I terminate"?

> Although I like your thinking, I want to reserve the right to change the
> Erlisp API (even drastically) without regard to backwards compatibility,
> at /least/ until a 0.1 release. ;)

Consider the right reserved :-) So early in development, flexibility
is more important than backwards compatibility.

Eric