New EEP draft: Pinning operator ^ in patterns
Mon Jan 18 11:35:50 CET 2021
On 18/01/2021 11:25, Raimo Niskanen wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 11:09:06AM +0100, Loïc Hoguin wrote:
>> As long as it's optional. It's the kind of scenario where I definitely
>> want to avoid using _X variables for normal builds, but want to keep
>> using _X variables during test builds for debug purposes. In that case
>> it's more a convenience than anything admittedly.
> For us working in large corporations that have coding policies; optional
> warnings are not optional in practice. The current trend is towards
> activating all warnings and using warnings as errors, in the name of
> improving code quality.
> So if there would be introduced an optional warning for double use of
> underscore variables, I would be forced to remove all such uses. At least
> one day in a not too distant future.
> When that happens I and other programmers will find some way to have debug
> printouts. It feels solvable.
I enable most warnings as well, and also warnings as error.
What I do however is *not* enable warnings as error in test builds. That
way I can take shortcuts while debugging.
I'm sure you can do the same while developing on your machine or in your
own branches, even if the main branch remains strict.
But yes it's a minor trouble at best.
More information about the erlang-questions