[erlang-bugs] Incorrect specs documentation for common_test

[Peter Andersson]

Hi Loïc,

This documentation feature was sometimes used, before typespecs became
common, to say "return value has no meaning". I.e. void() wasn't a type
reference as such.

This is old and confusing documentation syntax, and should be updated.
I'll have at it (since I have nothing to do)! :-D

Thanks!

Peter

Ericsson AB, Erlang/OTP

Loïc Hoguin wrote:
> There are a few functions and a few things in the documentation that say 
> they return void() instead of ok or other things. For example the 
> ct:comment/{1,2} functions.
>
> I notice that ct doesn't use typespecs so that might be why it didn't 
> get noticed until now. If someone has nothing to do, have at it. :-)
>
>