[erlang-questions] Intel Quad CPUs
Thu Sep 6 22:14:21 CEST 2007
+1 on less syntactic clutter.
The /2-ness of foo is clear from the remainder of the type specification
There are redundant parentheses too - are they neeed?
-spec(foo :: (integer, float) -> atom)
just reads better to me
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2007, Kostis Sagonas wrote:
>> In the new language you would write (or preferably change the above edoc
>> comment to be):
>> -spec(foo/2 :: ((integer(), float()) -> atom())).
> What is the reason for the trailing ()s? It would be nice if the syntax
> had less redundant visual noise.
More information about the erlang-questions