[erlang-bugs] term_to_binary/2 raises exceptions

Ramon Bynum <>
Wed Jun 27 18:55:48 CEST 2012

why not just make binary_to_term/2 be different function with /1. it will never need any other options someone ovously premature generalize iand make it take options instead of just making another function called binary_to_term_safe/1. anyways, i would like if you rename it to dudebro so i dont change my code

dudebro is one word. eitherways i dont think you understood me, i want to call the function as dudebro, not some function in my code

Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:25:28 +0100
Subject: Re: [erlang-bugs] term_to_binary/2 raises exceptions

It it binary_to_term/2 which takes 'safe' as an option. It should definitely *NOT* return {ok,Term} | {error,badarg} when the 'safe' option is used; it should always have the same structure for return values irrespective of options. So it either returns a term or signals a value.

dude_bro would be a better name than dudebro, separating words with '_' in atoms is a common convention. It would be a quick fix for you in your code.


 with [safe] as the second argument either throws an exception, or 
returns the decoded term. wouldnt it be better if it return either 
{error, badarg} or {ok, the decoded term} ? i think it should be changed
 to this. btw while at it can you rename the function to dudebro? ive 
already written my code and it uses that name everywher. thanks 		 	   		  

erlang-bugs mailing list


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-bugs/attachments/20120627/69d5b054/attachment.html>

More information about the erlang-bugs mailing list