[erlang-questions] Bug ?!

[Mats Cronqvist]

Robert Virding wrote:
> As I wrote in the not too distant past here in erlang-questions: macros 
> were a joke! Although you may need a slightly warped sense of humour to 
> appreciate it.

   it might have been funny to you, but it brings me daily pain. the 
permissiveness of the preprocessor is in my opinion the #1 maintainability issue 
in my project.
   and how anyone can find allowing unbalanced parentheses "funny" is beyond me.

>>   more to the point, i still fail to see how this;
>>
>>   receive
>>     X#r.a -> do_a();
>>
>>   is more unclean, inconsistent and inelegant than this;
>>
>>   XRA = X#r.a,
>>   receive
>>     XRA -> do_a();
> 
> If X#r.a is a valid pattern then what does this mean?
> 
> f(X#r.a) -> {yes,X}.
> 
> It's a valid pattern, so what does it mean?

   yeah, fine, i am enlightened. thank you.

>>   but hey, i'll take richard & richard's word for it.
> 
> You don't have to take Richard's word for it, but you should really 
> think through your suggestions properly to see their full implications. 
> Not just the immediate case in which you are interested.

   apparently i don't. i can just claim it was a joke.

   mats