[erlang-bugs] odd rr behaivor

Hans Bolinder <>
Mon Nov 12 13:39:22 CET 2007


[Matthew O'Gorman:]
> I wouldn't necessarily call this a bug, but it seems rr does not allow
> for passing an atom to it in the same way, for example
> 
> 1> ls().
> mog.hrl
> ok
> 2> rr(mog).
> {error, nofile}
> 3>rr("mog").
> []
> 4>rr("mog.hrl").
> [test]
> ...

Hi,

Sorry for not answering sooner.

rr(Atom) is essentially the same as rr(code:which(Atom)).

Instead of 'rr("long_path_to_a_header_file")' it is often convenient to
call 'rr(Module)' (Module an atom) where Module includes the header file.

An example: instead of
    rr("/usr/local/lib/erlang/lib/xmerl-1.1.5/include/xmerl.hrl").
one can do
    rr(xmerl).

Best regards,

Hans Bolinder, Erlang/OTP



More information about the erlang-bugs mailing list