[erlang-questions] Improve $handle_undefined_function
Wed Jan 23 15:13:07 CET 2013
On 23 jan 2013, at 03:57, Richard O'Keefe <ok@REDACTED> wrote:
> On 23/01/2013, at 4:39 AM, Tony Rogvall wrote:
>> Regardless of -extends() should be dropped or not I think $handle_undefined_function is a great addition
>> to the runtime system. It allows for various experiments and hacks.
> And it *prevents* other experiments and hacks.
Why? What kind of experiments and hacks are we talking about here?
Sure, I can think of some, but who is to decide what experiments are worth doing ?
( I just hope it is OTP in this case, do not chicken out ;)
> There is no such thing as a feature that is not a limitation.
And? If "users" do not add scary features like the '$handle_undefined_function' functions
in their modules they will be safe. if they ignore good advise they do void the guarantee.
But that, I think, is the glory of things.
More information about the erlang-questions