Using -spec for callbacks when defining behaviours

Steve Davis <>
Thu Mar 18 05:49:39 CET 2010


I find myself, having read this discussion, left rather cold and
wondering: what problem does this idea resolve? I haven't really hit
any practical issues with using behaviours, or with dependencies on
include files. Both seem to work pretty well as they stand.

As a coder, I'm concerned that this suggestion (and other forms of...
type-envy?) may not actually get in the way of what we are trying to
get done rather than assist it?

fwiw, a year ago I would probably have been an active advocate of more
language support for type constraints, but the longer I spend building
things using erlang, the more I have come to see things in an entirely
different light.

Just my 2c here of course.

On Mar 17, 6:01 am, Mikael Karlsson <> wrote:
> This would make a behaviour defining module closer to a interface
> specification and also decrease the depenencies of include files.

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list