Comments on: type_of(): Variable Type Detection in Erlang http://fullof.bs/type-of-variable-type-detection-in-erlang/ He just never stops talking Fri, 16 Dec 2011 00:30:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: John Haugeland http://fullof.bs/type-of-variable-type-detection-in-erlang/comment-page-1/#comment-846 John Haugeland Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:15:30 +0000 http://fullof.bs/?p=275#comment-846 Mr. Gustafsson: it becomes clear that I need to read more about bitstrings. Thank you for the clarification; expect a fix by monday. (I believe this is also what Vlad was trying to tell me.) Mr. Gustafsson: it becomes clear that I need to read more about bitstrings. Thank you for the clarification; expect a fix by monday. (I believe this is also what Vlad was trying to tell me.)

]]> By: John Haugeland http://fullof.bs/type-of-variable-type-detection-in-erlang/comment-page-1/#comment-845 John Haugeland Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:12:51 +0000 http://fullof.bs/?p=275#comment-845 No, the point is that having to write out more than a dozen guards each time you want to discover something's type is silly and a hassle. No, the point is that having to write out more than a dozen guards each time you want to discover something’s type is silly and a hassle.

]]> By: Patrick Logan http://fullof.bs/type-of-variable-type-detection-in-erlang/comment-page-1/#comment-844 Patrick Logan Fri, 25 Jul 2008 22:13:39 +0000 http://fullof.bs/?p=275#comment-844 "...not realizing they’re expected to use is_foo() guards. This function, type_of(), resolves the issue." I'm not sure how type_of() resolves the issue of new programmers not realizing they should use guards. But the implementation does server as a good example of using guards. Is that your point? :-D “…not realizing they’re expected to use is_foo() guards. This function, type_of(), resolves the issue.”

I’m not sure how type_of() resolves the issue of new programmers not realizing they should use guards.

But the implementation does server as a good example of using guards. Is that your point?
:-D

]]> By: Per Gustafsson http://fullof.bs/type-of-variable-type-detection-in-erlang/comment-page-1/#comment-843 Per Gustafsson Fri, 25 Jul 2008 16:29:09 +0000 http://fullof.bs/?p=275#comment-843 Binary is not deprecated. It is a subset of bitstrings. In fact it is the subset of bitstrings whose size in bits is evenly divisible by eight. This means that withyour current ordering the function will never return binay since all binaries are also bitstrings. Binary is not deprecated. It is a subset of bitstrings. In fact it is the subset of bitstrings whose size in bits is evenly divisible by eight. This means that withyour current ordering the function will never return binay since all binaries are also bitstrings.

]]> By: John Haugeland http://fullof.bs/type-of-variable-type-detection-in-erlang/comment-page-1/#comment-842 John Haugeland Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:45:57 +0000 http://fullof.bs/?p=275#comment-842 That's interesting, Vlad. I'm glad you told me about the redundancy issue. I've removed that comment. Before I re-order binary in front of bitstring, I'd like to know why you believe returning binary is preferable; I was under the (possibly incorrect) belief that the title "binary" was deprecated. That’s interesting, Vlad. I’m glad you told me about the redundancy issue. I’ve removed that comment.

Before I re-order binary in front of bitstring, I’d like to know why you believe returning binary is preferable; I was under the (possibly incorrect) belief that the title “binary” was deprecated.

]]> By: Vlad Dumitrescu http://fullof.bs/type-of-variable-type-detection-in-erlang/comment-page-1/#comment-841 Vlad Dumitrescu Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:32:31 +0000 http://fullof.bs/?p=275#comment-841 Hi, is_binary is not redundant in R12 4> BS = <>. <> 5> is_binary(BS). false 6> is_bitstring(BS). true The question is if for a binary (as in the old kind) you want to return 'binary' or 'bitstring'. I think 'binary' is correct, in which case that clause should be put before the bitstring one. regards, Vlad Hi,

is_binary is not redundant in R12

4> BS = <>.
<>
5> is_binary(BS).
false
6> is_bitstring(BS).
true

The question is if for a binary (as in the old kind) you want to return ‘binary’ or ‘bitstring’. I think ‘binary’ is correct, in which case that clause should be put before the bitstring one.

regards,
Vlad

]]>