principle of least surprise

Bengt Kleberg <>
Tue Nov 22 15:41:46 CET 2005


On 2005-11-22 15:25, Thomas Lindgren wrote:
...deleted
> Nor do I really see the point of two collections of
> nearly-identical type test primitives (is_X/1 vs X/1).

the question is better stated as why adding is_X/1 when there already 
exists X/1?

afaik the X/1 type test primitives where the only ones in the beginning. 
  is_X/1 where added afterward. backwards compatibility makes X/1 stay.


bengt



More information about the erlang-questions mailing list