[erlang-questions] OTP-9649 and further changes

Gleb Peregud <>
Thu Jan 19 07:50:13 CET 2012


Afaik this syntax is here to stay.

The syntax which lifetime is undefined yet is syntax mentioned by Yuri at
the beginning of the conversation
On Jan 19, 2012 7:47 AM, "Valentin Micic" <> wrote:

> Really sorry for rewinding this conversation back a bit, but I am getting
> a bit confused...
> So, let me ask explicitly: is the following syntax going to be valid going
> forward (e.g. R16 onwards):
>
> >
> > Eshell V5.9  (abort with ^G)
> > 1> erlang:length([1,2,3]).
> > 3
> > 2> M = erlang.
> > erlang
> > 3> M:length([1,2,3]).
> > 3
>
> ...or  would we be required to replace the above with:
>
> 67> F=fun erlang:length/1.
> #Fun<erlang.length.1>
>
> 68> F([1,2,3]).
> 3
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> V/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20120119/864b5bd8/attachment.html>


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list