New EEP draft: Pinning operator ^ in patterns

Karl Velicka karolis.velicka@REDACTED
Tue Jan 19 13:29:21 CET 2021

Are you sure you read the proposal? Quoting from

> Backwards Compatibility

> The addition of a new and previously unused operator ^ does not affect
the meaning of existing code, and the compiler will not emit any new
warnings or errors for existing code, unless explicitly enabled with
warn_unpinned_vars. This change is therefore fully backwards compatible.

To answer your other question, last breaking change that comes to my mind
is removal of gen_fsm in OTP 21 (or maybe 20?).

On Tue, 19 Jan 2021 at 12:25, Wojtek Surowka <wojteksurowka@REDACTED> wrote:

> >> I agree 100%. The most problematic part for me is that the proposed
> >> change is not backward compatible. I saw arguments that it will impact
> >> only small
> > And here come another one...
> > Read the proposal.  Read about possible migrations,
> > optionallity, migration paths, and related, before posting.
> I have read the proposal. Yes I understand that it is supposed to be not in
> one go, initially optional, migration paths are proposed etc. In the
> similar
> straightforward way in which you accused me of discussing something I did
> not read about can you answer a question please? Does the proposal
> introduce
> backward incompatibility? Yes or no?
> --
> Wojtek Surowka
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list