Re: mapping implemented in functions vs in structures

Good day,

But why not:

map_el(m1, m2, x1) -> y1;
map_el(m1, m2, x2) -> y2;
...
 or

map_el({m1, m2}, x1) -> y1;
map_el({m1, m2}, x2) -> y2;
...

Best Regards,
Vladimir Sekissov

hp> I want to map entity x1 on machine m1 to y1 on m2 ...
hp> 
hp> I can see there are two choices and don't know which one
hp> is the more idiomatic way in erlang world:
hp> 
hp> (1) functions
hp>     m1_m2(x1) -> y1;
hp>     m1_m2(x2) -> y2.
hp>     m3_m6(a1) -> b1;
hp>     m3_m6(a2) -> b2....
hp>     
hp>     At run time, 
hp>     suppose A = m1, B = m2, X = x1.
hp>             To get y1,
hp>             I will need to form a string S ="m1_m2(x1)" 
hp>             and evaluate it.
hp>             btw, how do I do this ?   erl_eval:expr() looks complicated.
hp>             
hp> (2) structures
hp>    {{m1_m2, [{x1, y1},
hp>              {x2, y2}]},
hp>     {m3_m6, [{a1, b1},
hp>              {a2, b2}]}
hp>              
hp>     Given A, B, X in (1),  finding y1 becomes
hp>     a matter of parsing the structure.
hp>     
hp> thanks,
hp> HP