Erlang is getting too big
Tue Oct 14 16:25:51 CEST 2003
--- Richard Carlsson <richardc@REDACTED> wrote:
> > 2. Assuming that we do:
> > Another approach to unifying guards with
> > would be to introduce the appropriate type tests
> > BIFs. Apart from float/1, this seems
> Well, the "is_..." forms are BIFs, but I assume you
> mean to keep the names integer(X) etc. and also
> introduce them as BIFs.
> But since auto-recognized BIFs override local
> definitions (sic!),
> this would probably break a lot of existing code.
If you mean BIFs that do not need the erlang: prefix,
then the override nowadays goes in the other
direction. (And correctly so, IMO.)
abs(X) when X > 0 ->
... Warning: defining BIF abs/1
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
More information about the erlang-questions