[erlang-questions] clarify: how to express this elegantly

[David Mercer]

How about:

	Mod = (case Value of
		"state"       -> circuit_monitor;
		"rx_bit_rate" -> circuit_monitor;
		"tx_bit_rate" -> circuit_monitor;
		"ebno"        -> circuit_monitor;
		"packetloss"  -> node_pinger;
		"rtt"         -> node_pinger
		end),
	Pid = (if Mod = circuit_monitor -> CircuitMonitorPid; true ->
NodePingerPid),
	Mod:plot_node_value(Pid, Socket,
				RequestId, CircuitId, FromDateTime,
ToDateTime, Width, Height, Value
			)

I'm not sure if that's any prettier, though...

DBM

-----Original Message-----
From: erlang-questions-bounces@REDACTED
[mailto:erlang-questions-bounces@REDACTED] On Behalf Of Matej Kosik
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 14:36
To: erlang-questions@REDACTED
Subject: [erlang-questions] clarify: how to express this elegantly

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Friends,

I wander, how can I express this:

    case Value of
        "state" ->
            ?D,
            circuit_monitor:plot_node_value(CircuitMonitorPid, Socket,
                RequestId, CircuitId, FromDateTime, ToDateTime, Width,
Height, Value
            );
        "rx_bit_rate" ->
            ?D,
            circuit_monitor:plot_node_value(CircuitMonitorPid, Socket,
                RequestId, CircuitId, FromDateTime, ToDateTime, Width,
Height, Value
            );
        "tx_bit_rate" ->
            ?D,
            circuit_monitor:plot_node_value(CircuitMonitorPid, Socket,
                RequestId, CircuitId, FromDateTime, ToDateTime, Width,
Height, Value
            );
        "ebno" ->
            ?D,
            circuit_monitor:plot_node_value(CircuitMonitorPid, Socket,
                RequestId, CircuitId, FromDateTime, ToDateTime, Width,
Height, Value
            );
        "packetloss" ->
            ?D,
            node_pinger:plot_node_value(NodePingerPid, Socket,
                RequestId, CircuitId, FromDateTime, ToDateTime, Width,
Height, Value
            );
        "rtt" ->
            ?D,
            node_pinger:plot_node_value(NodePingerPid, Socket,
                RequestId, CircuitId, FromDateTime, ToDateTime, Width,
Height, Value
            )
    end

more elegantly. Via some kind of "variant patterns" such as:

    case Value of
        "state" | "rx_bit_rate" | "tx_bit_rate" | "ebno" ->
            ?D,
            circuit_monitor:plot_node_value(CircuitMonitorPid, Socket,
                RequestId, CircuitId, FromDateTime, ToDateTime, Width,
Height, Value
            );
        "packet_loss" | "round_trip_time" ->
            ?D,
            node_pinger:plot_node_value(NodePingerPid, Socket,
                RequestId, CircuitId, FromDateTime, ToDateTime, Width,
Height, Value
            )
    end

but these do not exist :(
These "variant patterns" could be introduced without any problems in special
cases when neither
variant contains unbound variable.
- --
Matej Kosik
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHVbo7L+CaXfJI/hgRArySAJ47+Iin/aGeIBP04uNcJ/I5VlS2PwCePi27
QEDkkwClpMEL9WuA/3LICAo=
=Y9ul
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
erlang-questions@REDACTED
http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions