Redirecting functions calls ?

[Sean Hinde]

I think we can wait, now that we are aware of it. We would not go back  
and re-build all of our running systems for this one.

Thanks,
Sean

P.S. If anyone is wavering about buying a commercial licence then I'd  
suggest that it's worth  every penny/cent and then some. Just access to  
the commercial patches is worth it for us -  aside from the awesome  
support we get from Kenneth and the team.



On 23 Apr 2004, at 10:31, Bjorn Gustavsson wrote:

> The bug has been corrected in our R10B development branch.
>
> If our paying customers would find it necessary, we will also
> release a compiler patch for R9C.
>
> The second function (wow/1 in this case) will never be correctly
> executed. There will always be a function clause exception. The only
> really bad case is if the second function expects more arguments than
> the first function - in that case the emulator could crash.
>
> /Bjorn
>
> Sean Hinde <sean.hinde@REDACTED> writes:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Actually this is almost possible - I discovered a compiler bug just
>> today:
>>
>> -module(compiler_bug).
>> -export([test/1, wow/1]).
>>
>> test(A) when fred ->
>>      {ok, A}.
>>
>> wow(A) ->
>>      wow.
>>
>> This compiles fine. Trying this out:
>>
>> 175> compiler_bug:test(1).
>>
>> =ERROR REPORT==== 22-Apr-2004::23:11:45 ===
>> Error in process <0.1000.0> on node 'eradius@REDACTED' with exit
>> value:
>> {function_clause,[{compiler_bug,wow,[1]},{erl_eval,do_apply,5},{shell, 
>> ev
>> al_loop,2}]}
>>
>> ** exited: {function_clause,[{compiler_bug,wow,[1]},
>>                               {erl_eval,do_apply,5},
>>                               {shell,eval_loop,2}]} **
>>
>> I haven't managed to make it correctly call wow(1), but the error
>> report suggests that my call to test/1 did indeed result in a call to
>> wow/1
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Sean
>>
>
> -- 
> Björn Gustavsson, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB