Erlang improvement?

Robert Virding rv@REDACTED
Wed Sep 19 23:44:04 CEST 2001

Kostis Sagonas <kostis@REDACTED> writes:
... Stuff about M:F(...) vs {M,F}(...)
> 1. Are there actual uses of this thingie?
> 2. Will you feel deprived of something if the support for this
>    "feature" is discontinued?
> 3. Will you object if this happens soon?

You can actually write the M:F(...) form today (with the caveats in my
previous mail) but the {M,F} form is still allowed for backwards
compatibility.  I don't know if anyone uses it, I never have.  It was
added back in the dark ages before real fun's as a poor man's
functional object, something which was ONE thing which could be
created dynamically, passed around and applied to call a function.
Also it needed no new data types and a very small modifiaction the

I would personally have nothing against removing it, but it Ericsson
Erlang group and major uers who decide.  It not anything that I worry


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list