[erlang-questions] Did Erlang's grammar change in R16A?
Thu Feb 14 20:08:06 CET 2013
On 2013-02-14 20:03, Evan Miller wrote:
> As I understood it, dots are legal in unquoted atom names. This
> appears not to be the case in R16A. Is this intentional?
> Erlang R15B03 (erts-188.8.131.52) [source] [smp:8:8] [async-threads:0]
> [hipe] [kernel-poll:false]
> Eshell V184.108.40.206 (abort with ^G)
> 1> a.b.
> Erlang R16A (erts-5.10) [source] [smp:8:8] [async-threads:10] [hipe]
> Eshell V5.10 (abort with ^G)
> 1> a.b.
> * 1: syntax error before: '.'
> Kai Janson noticed this because the "mongodb" package fails to compile
> under R16A due to a syntax error on an atom with a dot in it.
> I couldn't find any mention of changing the grammar in the README. Is
> this a bug?
The automatic concatenation of atoms separated by dots was originally
introduced with the experimental "packages" system, and was probably
lost again when this feature was dropped from the codebase.
More information about the erlang-questions