Erlang is getting too big
Wed Oct 15 10:12:46 CEST 2003
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
> Richard Carlsson <richardc@REDACTED> wrote:
> [that if you define a local function with the same name
> = (symbol/arity) as a pervasive built-in, then you get a
> warning that says you've redefined it, and you can call
> it from the outside, but on the inside you get the built-in].
> It seems to me that this is clearly a bug. The warning is useful, but
> a direct call to a function with a visible local definition should
> _always_ find that local definition, or what are scope rules for?
In Erlang, it seems that the main use of scope rules is to make
interesting exceptions from them.
Richard Carlsson (richardc@REDACTED) (This space intentionally left blank.)
E-mail: Richard.Carlsson@REDACTED WWW: http://user.it.uu.se/~richardc/
"Having users is like optimization: the wise course is to delay it."
-- Paul Graham
More information about the erlang-questions