Type Specification of net:getnameinfo()
Wed Jan 27 04:43:25 CET 2021
Thanks a lot Nicolas.
Will go through, and then may be express my hunch that this is a way in
which details are either leaking and/or is not sufficient at the level of a
type spec. But who knows I endup correcting myself after a little follow up.
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021, 10:05 PM Nicolas Martyanoff <khaelin@REDACTED> wrote:
> On 2021-01-26 21:46, Nalin Ranjan wrote:
> > 2. In this particular case of type specification, the only difference is
> > one of the parameters of the function. I was also wondering if we could
> > have used a union instead to write the same type spec, it would have been
> > simpler?
> > For example,
> > Instead of writing a type spec like this
> > -ifdef(SOME_PRAGMA_CONDITION)
> > SomeVar :: xxx_type().
> > -else
> > SomeVar :: yyy_type().
> > We could specify the same type spec as:
> > SomeVar :: xxx_type() | yyy_type().
> > Any reason we preferred the former over the latter?
> If Erlang is compiled without socket support, some types will not exist at
> all. Using the preprocessor makes it possible to provide specifications
> with types which actually exist, with or without socket support.
>  https://erlang.org/doc/reference_manual/macros.html
> Nicolas Martyanoff
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions