[erlang-questions] What is a tid()?

[Per Hedeland]

Hi,

I never saw any response to the below... If the fact that the ets module
"claims" a builtin/"global" type tid() instead of ets:tid() is *not* a
bug, is there perhaps some rationale for this?

--Per Hedeland

Per Hedeland <per@REDACTED> wrote:
>
>Per Hedeland <per@REDACTED> wrote:
>>
>>Kostis Sagonas <kostis@REDACTED> wrote:
>>>
>>>Per Hedeland wrote:
>>>> $ erlc test.erl
>>>> ./test.erl:5: referring to built-in type tid as a remote type; please take out the module name
>>>
>>>tid() is a built-in opaque type for ETS table identifiers.
>>
>>Thanks - maybe it's already in the queue for an update to
>>http://www.erlang.org/doc/reference_manual/typespec.html?
>>
>>>These cannot be redefined.
>>>
>>>However, the warning you have run into predates the introduction of 
>>>remote types and is probably a bug.  Although one should currently use 
>>>tid() to refer to ets:tid(), it should be possible to use a tid() type 
>>>that one of their modules export.
>>
>>Well, it can't be defined in the other module anyway, can it? If so
>>that's perfectly OK by me, and the error is appropriate - it's just a
>>documentation omission.
>
>Actually, I take that back - thinking about it, it seems very wrong that
>this tid() should be built-in. Or rather, that it has the "global" name
>tid() instead of only ets:tid(), which would be both clearer and more
>logical (currently ets:tid() can't even be used). It's even listed along
>with match_spec() (which *requires* the ets: prefix) in ets(3).
>
>As far as I can see (only looking in the documentation....), all the
>other built-in / "global" types are defined in terms of the language,
>either as fundamental types or derived from other types - whereas tid()
>can only be defined in terms of a specific module (that the module
>happens to be partially implemented in the VM shouldn't be relevant).
>
>Surely this is actually a bug, and the typespec documentation that omits
>tid() is correct?
>
>--Per