[erlang-questions] OTP-9649 and further changes

[Gleb Peregud]

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" <v@REDACTED> 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.htm>