[erlang-questions] atoms in iodata() / iolist()
Mon May 25 18:43:51 CEST 2015
On 05/25, Antonio SJ Musumeci wrote:
>Does anyone know of any backwards incompatibility which could arise if
>atoms were added to the iodata() and iolist() definitions?
>iolist() = maybe_improper_list(byte() | binary() | atom() | iolist(),
>binary() | )
>iodata() = iolist() | atom() | binary()
Why would you do that?
But yes, there could be incompatibilities. For example, the `iodata()`
type is defined in terms of `iolist()`, and operations such as
`erlang:port_control()` return `iodata()` as a type. As such, operations
to port programs could now technically start returning atoms to code
that won't expect such things.
More information about the erlang-questions