[erlang-patches] Forbid local fun names in Core Erlang guards

Anthony Ramine <>
Wed Jan 16 12:02:56 CET 2013


I can't reproduce any of these failures.

Could I have more informations about how they failed?

My wild guess is that it is related (maybe) to the bootstrap compiler,
but I'm probably wrong.

Björn, any idea?

Regards,

-- 
Anthony Ramine

Le 16 janv. 2013 à 11:46, Fredrik a écrit :

> Hello Anthony,
> Your patch is failing the following testsuites and testcases:
> compilation_SUITE : self_compile
> inline_SUITE : decode1
> inline_SUITE : pseudoknot
> 
> Please correct and give me notice,
> 
> BR Fredrik Gustafsson
> Erlang OTP Team
> On 01/15/2013 11:40 AM, Fredrik wrote:
>> Hello Anthony ;)
>> It is now in the 'master-pu' branch.
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> BR Fredrik Gustafsson
>> Erlang OTP Team
>> On 01/15/2013 11:28 AM, Anthony Ramine wrote:
>>> Repost on only erlang-patches so that Fredrik's MUA see it;)
>>> 
>>> -- Anthony Ramine Début du message réexpédié :
>>>> >  De : Anthony Ramine<>
>>>> >  Objet : Rép : Local function names in Core Erlang guards
>>>> >  Date : 11 janvier 2013 17:12:37 HNEC
>>>> >  À : erlang-bugs Bugs<>, erlang patches<>
>>>> >  Cc : Bjorn Gustavsson<>
>>>> > >  Hi,
>>>> > >  I wrote a really small patch to forbid local fun variables in Core Erlang guards.
>>>> >  There is no test case as there is no test suite for core_lint.
>>>> > >  I know the code freeze for R16 is soon but this is really a very small thing.
>>>> > >      git fetchhttps://github.com/nox/otp.git  forbid-locals-in-core-guards
>>>> > >      https://github.com/nox/otp/compare/erlang:master...forbid-locals-in-core-guards
>>>> >      https://github.com/nox/otp/compare/erlang:master...forbid-locals-in-core-guards.patch
>>>> > >  Regards,
>>>> > >  -- >  Anthony Ramine
>>>> > >  Le 19 nov. 2012 à 11:02, Anthony Ramine a écrit :
>>>> >
>>>>> >>  Hi,
>>>>> >> >>  While patching the compiler to allow substitutions of variables which values are
>>>>> >>  local function names [1], I discovered that core_lint doesn't forbid them in guards,
>>>>> >>  even though that makes the compiler passes further down the road generate badly-formed
>>>>> >>  BEAM code.
>>>>> >> >>  Is that a bug in core_lint or a bug in the BEAM code generation? Should local function
>>>>> >>  names be allowed in guards?
>>>>> >> >>  If it is a bug in core_lint, I can make a patch for that; if it is a bug in the BEAM
>>>>> >>  code generation I would love to fix it and remove the code I wrote to avoid the
>>>>> >>  substitution in guards... but I lack knowledge about the BEAM innards.
>>>>> >> >>  Regards,
>>>>> >> >>  [1]http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-patches/2012-November/003137.html 
>>>>> >> >>  -- >>  Anthony Ramine
>>>>> >> 
>>>> > 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-patches mailing list
>> 
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-patches
> 



More information about the erlang-patches mailing list