Language change proposal

Bengt Kleberg Bengt.Kleberg@REDACTED
Fri Oct 24 11:13:43 CEST 2003

Vlad Dumitrescu wrote:
> From: "Shawn Pearce" <spearce@REDACTED>
>>It might also be nice to define other dependencies such as:
>>-require(stdlib, "5.3").
>>to indicate that this module would need a version of stdlib that understand
>>the calls available in version 5.3 of stdlib.
> Mmm, wouldn't there be confusions with the stdlib application's version? After
> all, as user of stdlib, I don't care what it's using inside, just what
> interfaces it has. So in this case i'd expect to check stdlib's version - but if

i do not think anybody would expect ''require'' to check anything _but_ 
the interface to a module. the implementation is surely uninteresting 
for this purpose?

note that, imho, the first argument to ''require'' should be the 
smallest part that is distributed. currently erlang is a monolith (but i 
hope this changes rsn :-), so only

-require(erlang, "R9A").

would make sense.
when we get seperate pieces of erlang, it would make sense to use 
''stdlib'', or something (''core''?).


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list