[erlang-questions] erl_syntax[_lib] error handling

Anthony Ramine n.oxyde@REDACTED
Sat Apr 19 14:53:39 CEST 2014

The defensive programming I was talking about was that revert/1 tries to not crash on weird input, sorry if that was not clear.

Anthony Ramine

Le 19 avr. 2014 à 13:57, Richard Carlsson <carlsson.richard@REDACTED> a écrit :

> On 2014-04-19 13:51 , Anthony Ramine wrote:
>> I think the defensive programming in syntax_tools should be removed entirely.
> You might have misunderstood - my point was that there isn't any defensive programming in there. Hence, if you feed it invalid input, you can't be sure what the resulting exception will be, if any.
>> How revert/1 manages to sometimes return custom nodes as is but sometimes crash and sometimes return the actual reverted node drives me insane.
> That's a different issue. When I originally wrote erl_syntax, it seemed best to pass through anything that couldn't be handled, since the format was more or less undocumented in those days. That could probably be changed now.
>    /Richard

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list