Compiler backwards compatibility

Bjorn Gustavsson <>
Tue Sep 6 17:00:25 CEST 2005


"Vlad Dumitrescu XX \(LN/EAB\)" <> writes:

> Hi,
> 
> Okay, I checked these options, but 'r7' is a little too strong, as I need some of the features in any case. 
> 

You mean no_float_opt and no_new_funs? The code should still work on R9, although
floating point operations will be slower.

> What options should I use in order to get R9 compatibility? The current complaint is for opcode 112, which should mean I have to use no_new_apply, but are there more?

no_new_binaries. I mentioned that in my previous answer (following the "OR").

/Björn

> 
> best regards,
> Vlad
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: 
> > [mailto:]On Behalf Of Bjorn 
> > Gustavsson
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 2:15 PM
> > To: 
> > Subject: Re: Compiler backwards compatibility
> > 
> > 
> > While not officially supported, we have some options we use for
> > testing that should work:
> > 
> > erlc +r7 file.erl
> > 
> > OR
> > 
> > erlc +no_new_binaries +no_new_apply file.erl
> > 
> > /Björn


-- 
Björn Gustavsson, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB



More information about the erlang-questions mailing list