Hi,<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/18/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Aaron Denney</b> <<a href="mailto:email@example.com">firstname.lastname@example.org</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
That seems reasonable. But it would be nice to have the type<br>information available to enable tools like dialyzer to check<br>implementation against spec where appropriate. Even if you think actually<br>giving type signatures for functions is too much work for not enough
<br>benefit, having the types defined so that everyone used the same ones<br>in their own documentation, would be very helpful.<br></blockquote></div><br>I just stumbled on this: the latest erl_parse.yrl contains some stuff related to adding type annotations to record definitions and specifying function type signatures. It doesn't seem to be functional yet - at least when I try it I get some internal crashes in erl_parse. So I suppose it's something coming in R12.
<br><br>If this was brought to people's attention before, I must have missed it and I apologize for increasing the noise level.<br><br>best regards,<br>Vlad<br><br><br>