[erlang-questions] Somebody please correct my -callback understanding
Wed Dec 14 19:52:17 CET 2011
Dnia śro, 14 gru 2011, 19:38:33 Daniel Luna pisze:
> 2011/12/14 Damian Dobroczyński <>:
>> Wow, It's a miracle! I've just found the answer and (what I understand)
>> a bug. IT IS "-behavior (...)" which is perfectly understood by the
>> compiler but not by by the dialyzer! Dialyzer expects "-behaviour (...)"
>> (note the different spelling).
> This is not a bug. Erlang has always used 'behaviour' (and
> 'behaviour_info'). See
> As a side note, Erlang allows for any user defined elements starting with -.
> If you for example add the following line to your code
> then this is fully legal Erlang, and its effect is seen if you run
>From Erlang Reference Manual:
The atom Behaviour gives the name of the behaviour, which can be a user
defined behaviour or one of the OTP standard behaviours gen_server,
gen_fsm, gen_event or supervisor.
The spelling behavior is also accepted."""" <--- HERE
It's a bug. Besides as I mentioned, the compiler perfectly understand
the attribute "-behavior" giving me warnings about missing callbacks.
So, compiler understand and behave correctly with "-behavior" -
(Unfortunately (or maybe not) my code if full of "behaviors" ;) just
because it is accepted and understood not even deprecated).
More information about the erlang-questions