[erlang-questions] Guards syntax for multiple values
Wed Mar 27 09:56:18 CET 2019
On 26/03/2019 23:12, Dmitry Belyaev wrote:
> No current code will be broken if an infix 'in' operator is parsed based
> on context as it's not currently used.
> If an auto-impotred function 'erlang:is_member' is introduced, the code
> previously using locally defined function 'is_member' will be broken. If
> the bif is not auto-imported its usage in guards will be very confusing.
> All these proposed changes - a new operator, or a new function - to me
> look as too small changes, not really solving the main problem - absence
> of convenient and accepted way to metaprogramming.
We do have an accepted way. "Don't do it."
Not sure why the discussion moved into metaprogramming territory,
there's no need to add new syntax for this. Just a new guard function.
More information about the erlang-questions