[erlang-questions] Illegal Guard?

[Theepan]

"WHY ARE YOU ASSIGNING INSIDE A GUARD?"

There was another thread regarding the issues about automatic masking of
binaries during construction. I was checking to see how to convert the
lvalue into a binary (so that it will get masked as well.) before matching
takes place.. Sometimes I try some crazy things :)

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 6:39 PM, zxq9 <zxq9@REDACTED> wrote:

> On 2016年2月5日 金曜日 18:10:33 Theepan wrote:
> > Team - Any idea?
> >
> > 60> is_integer(A = 5).
> > true
> > 61> fun () when is_integer(A = 5) -> ok end.
> > * 2: illegal guard expression
> > 62> fun () when is_integer(5) -> ok end.
> > #Fun<erl_eval.20.54118792>
> > 63> fun (A = 5) when is_integer(A) -> ok end.
> > #Fun<erl_eval.6.54118792>
>
> I think it has to do with binding VS masking. That is to say, what part
> of a function head is not yet referring to an external scope, so you can't
> yet create a closure over an existing value:
>
>   1> is_integer(A = 5).
>   true
>   2> B = fun() -> A end.
>   #Fun<erl_eval.20.54118792>
>   3> C = fun(A = 6) -> A end.
>   #Fun<erl_eval.6.54118792>
>   4> D = fun(A) -> A end.
>   #Fun<erl_eval.6.54118792>
>
> A is now actually assigned to 5 from our first statement -- which is
> running within the context of an ongoing fun (I think). That being as
> it may, anything assigned within the head of a function, apparently to
> include guards, is masking whatever else existed. Its not about
> is_integer/1 as much as it is about where it is used.
>
>   5> A.
>   5
>   6> B().
>   5
>   7> C(6).
>   6
>   8> D(7).
>   7
>
> Now let's drop the current scope's memory of A:
>
>   9> f(A).
>   ok
>   10> A.
>   * 1: variable 'A' is unbound
>   11> B().
>   5
>   12> C(7).
>   ** exception error: no function clause matching
> erl_eval:'-inside-an-interpreted-fun-'(7)
>   13> D(7).
>   7
>
> Now let's see what happens if we use an assignment within a guard within
> a function's inner scope:
>
>   14> E = fun(A) when is_integer(A) ->
>   14>          case is_integer(Z = A) of
>   14>             true -> Z;
>   14>             false -> "strangeness"
>   14>         end
>   14>      end.
>   #Fun<erl_eval.6.54118792>
>   15> E(10).
>   10
>
> I don't know for sure, but this certainly leads me to believe it has
> something to do with where the actual scoping boundary lies.
>
> In other news... another thought crossed my mind...
>
> WHY ARE YOU ASSIGNING INSIDE A GUARD?
>
> Just to deepen the mystery because needlessly exploring corner cases
> that should never occur in actual code is sort of funny to me...
>
>   16> A = 5.
>   5
>   17> F = fun(A) when is_integer(A) ->
>   17>          case is_integer(Z = A) of
>   17>             true -> Z;
>   17>             false -> "strangeness"
>   17>         end
>   17>      end.
>   #Fun<erl_eval.6.54118792>
>   18> F(5).
>   5
>   19> F(10).
>   10
>   20> A.
>   5
>
> Someone who really knows will get bored and give a real answer on Monday,
> perhaps... ?
>
> -Craig
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20160206/b05e4135/attachment.htm>