other annotations

Michael P. empro2@REDACTED
Fri Jan 29 19:03:38 CET 2021


On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 11:52:11 -0800
Michael Truog <mjtruog@REDACTED> wrote:

> I added a description at https://bugs.erlang.org/browse/ERL-373 for
> using pure/impure instead of spec for Erlang type specifications (to
> provide the concept of a function type). Adding it as something for

`-spec` is now both pure and unpure^{*1}, thus must be regarded as unpure,
thus equals a hypothetical `-unpure`.

Only `-pure` is needed in addition?

> dialyzer to evaluate would be helpful. I don't believe it is very
> important to make it easy to create your own guard functions, but this
> could be a step in that direction.

I reckon it would be of high(est?) importance to make sure
that the probability of purity of homebrewed guard functions
cannot be lower than that of the current ones ...



Car and cider give me a pleasant mediterranean
feeling, whereas cdr makes me shudder.

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list