[erlang-questions] No Namespace for Macros

[Robert Virding]

Erlang macros are modeled directly on C macros, the version based on tokens
and not on text. And as do C macros Erlang macros only exist within a
preprocessor, they have no life of their own outside that. In this sense
they are not like functions or variables from other languages.

It is important to realise that an include file does not have a life of its
own, it only exists within the file which includes it. So anything defined
in it becomes part of the including file and in this respect it is perfectly
logical that there is only one namespace.

Anyway that is the reasoning behind the way they are.

Robert

2009/10/15 Attila Rajmund Nohl <attila.r.nohl@REDACTED>

> Macros (and records) can be defined outside modules, unlike functions.
> I think they are handled by a "preprocessor", not the compiler. Don't
> forget that macros in C++ are also outside classes and namespaces -
> the Erlang macro is modeled more like the C/C++ macros, not like Java
> variables.
>
> 2009/10/15, sapan shah <sapan.gcet@REDACTED>:
> > As Anupag said it rightly & Bengt showed... there is a way around..
> > But my curiosity is,
> > If it is for functions, why it is not for macros??? What would the
> > developers of Erlang have thought & made it like that???
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Anupam Kapoor
> > <anupam.kapoor@REDACTED>wrote:
> >
> >> ofcourse another way to skin the cat is to return constants from
> >> functions in different modules...
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Anupam Kapoor <
> anupam.kapoor@REDACTED>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> For exapmle, Java supports this (public static final variables).
> >> >>
> >> >> Any Explanation?????
> >> > erlang doesn't have any notion of objects. in java, each '.java' file
> >> > contains a corresponding class-definition, and you can have multiple
> >> > instances of those objects defined...
> >> >
> >> > kind regards
> >> > anupam
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > In the beginning was the lambda, and the lambda was with Emacs, and
> >> > Emacs was the lambda.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> In the beginning was the lambda, and the lambda was with Emacs, and
> >> Emacs was the lambda.
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Sapan Shah
> >
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org
>
>