[erlang-patches] [erlang-bugs] syntax_tools anonymous function error

Anthony Ramine <>
Wed Oct 2 10:55:26 CEST 2013


I guess we can merge it now then.

Le 1 oct. 2013 à 23:56, Richard Carlsson a écrit :

> Maybe I got confused - was the format change in the other direction, i.e., used to be atoms but is now trees? In that case, I guess you're right. Just make sure that the code does the right thing in all combinations of cases, and you're done. :-)
> 
>   /Richard
> 
> On 2013-10-01 23:41, Anthony Ramine wrote:
>> In fact I really don't see what you mean. The problem is revert_implicit_fun/1 calling concrete/1 on the individual parts when it shouldn't.
>> 
>> I don't see how changing another function would fix anything.
>> 
>> Le 1 oct. 2013 à 14:30, Anthony Ramine a écrit :
>> 
>>> Thanks for the reply, will amend this tonight.
>>> 
>>> Le 1 oct. 2013 à 14:25, Richard Carlsson a écrit :
>>> 
>>>> Sorry, drowning in stuff as usual. Anthony, I trust that your analysis of why that clause could be deleted, so that should be ok. But I thought there was something weird about the format changes, and now I think I see what it is: calls like arity_qualifier_body(Name) should never return a naked atom or integer - always a syntax tree. So the fix for the revert "fun F/A" case should be done in implicit_fun_name/1 instead, just as it's handled for "fun M:F/A". And in the reverting of "fun M:F/A", you shouldn't have to change anything at all, since it's already handled.
>>>> 
>>>>  /Richard
>>>> 
>>>> On 2013-10-01 13:58 , Henrik Nord wrote:
>>>>> Hi
>>>>> I was awaiting an answer to this:
>>>>>    @richcarl <https://github.com/richcarl>Should I amend this commit?
>>>>> And the possible amend to the commit.
>>>>> 
>>>>> If that is not going to happen I can put it through the test-merge precedure
>>>>> 
>>>>> /Henrik
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 2013-10-01 13:27, Anthony Ramine wrote:
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I see on the development page that an action is required from me for this patch [1].
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> And what exactly is required from me..?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> [1]http://www.erlang.org/development/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Le 20 mai 2013 à 10:12, Fredrik a écrit :
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 05/19/2013 12:33 PM, Anthony Ramine wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hello Michael,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> This patch fixes support of implicit funs with variables in igor.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 	git fetchhttps://github.com/nox/otp.git  igor-funs
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 	https://github.com/nox/otp/compare/erlang:maint...igor-funs
>>>>>>>> 	https://github.com/nox/otp/compare/erlang:maint...igor-funs.patch
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hello Anthony,
>>>>>>> I've fetched your patch and it should be visible in the 'pu' branch shortly.
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> BR Fredrik Gustafsson
>>>>>>> Erlang OTP Team
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> /Henrik Nord Erlang/OTP
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> erlang-patches mailing list
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-patches
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Anthony Ramine
>>> 
>> 
> 

-- 
Anthony Ramine



More information about the erlang-patches mailing list