*** SPAM *** Re: fun opacity

Peter-Henry Mander erlang@REDACTED
Mon Jan 10 13:46:28 CET 2005

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 07:17:49 -0500
Vance Shipley <vances@REDACTED> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 11:09:18AM +0000, Peter-Henry Mander wrote:
> }
> }  I presume this is an implementation of a callback, or something like that?
> Yes, precisely.
> 	-Vance

Would a reference serve your purpose, or is there something in the
input-context you wish to preserve?

What would happen if the originating module was reloaded with a modified
version? Will the old version of the code still remain resident until
the fun returns home to execute? I suspect that the code loading logic
may not know about the itinerant fun. The results may be undetermined.

I'm curious to know because I tend to use funs where, upon reflection,
simpler data types would suffice with less potential unanticipated
results, and more potential to expand capability, because fewer usage
assumptions are made too early.


P.s. I feel the caffeine effect...

"The Tao of Programming
 flows far away 
 and returns 
 on the wind of morning."

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list