[erlang-questions] 12B4 dialyzer problem 2
Thu Sep 11 12:55:56 CEST 2008
Anthony Shipman wrote:
> It appears that dialyzer can't prove that the parent and strmID fields can
> never be undefined. This isn't surprising. But I expected that dialyzer would
> accept the declaration
> parent:: pid(),
> to tell it that the field is never undefined.
Currently, the only way to say that a field cannot contain 'undefined'
is to have a default value in the record declaration. The reason is that
all record constructions must follow the type declarations, and if you
construct an empty record without a default value the type must also
> If I am going to get this problem everywhere I use this basic gen_server idiom
> then dialyzer is going to give me lots and lots of false negatives.
If Dialyzer reports a false positive, then this is a bug. You do not
include the contract for streamIface:specialToDevice/3, so I can't
determine if it is a false positive. Dialyzer should not complain unless
one of the arguments is _totally_ incompatible with the contract, i.e.,
the argument type and the contract type has no intersection.
More information about the erlang-questions