Unsettling dialyzer errors

Nicolas Martyanoff <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lang.erlang.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi,

I have come across Dialyzer errors which feel incorrect to me. I
managed to reproduce the problem with a minimal example:

    -module(dialyzer_issue).
    
    -export([foo/1]).
    
    -type t1() :: a | b.
    -type t2() :: x | y.
    
    -spec f1(t1()) -> {ok, integer()} | error.
    f1(a) -> {ok, 1};
    f1(b) -> {ok, 2};
    f1(_) -> error.
    
    -spec f2(t2()) -> {ok, integer()} | error.
    f2(x) -> {ok, 3};
    f2(y) -> {ok, 4};
    f2(_) -> error.
    
    -spec foo(t1() | t2()) -> integer().
    foo(V) ->
      case f1(V) of
        {ok, N1} ->
          N1;
        error ->
          case f2(V) of
            {ok, N2} ->
              N2;
            error ->
              0
          end
      end.

The code works as expected:
[dialyzer_issue:foo(N) || N <- [a, b, c, x, y, z]] evaluates to [1,2,0,3,4,0].

Running Dialyzer (OTP 23.2.2) produces the following errors:

dialyzer_issue.erl:13: Invalid type specification for function dialyzer_issue:f2/1. The success typing is 
          ('a' | 'b') -> 'error'
dialyzer_issue.erl:14: The pattern 
          'x' can never match the type 
          'a' | 'b'
dialyzer_issue.erl:15: The pattern 
          'y' can never match the type 
          'a' | 'b'
dialyzer_issue.erl:24: The call dialyzer_issue:f2
         (V :: 'a' | 'b') breaks the contract 
          (t2()) -> {'ok', integer()} | 'error'

It feels wrong to me: foo/1 first calls f1/1 which will always return
a value of type {ok, integer()} for (V :: a | b), therefore f2/1 cannot
be called for a or b. Since the argument of foo/1 is of type
t1() | t2(), I would expect Dialyzer to correctly infer that f2/1 can
only be called with a value of type t2(), since it cannot be called with
a value of type t1().

The other errors are even more nonsensical but I imagine they derive
from the apparently incorrect last inference.

I am used to Dialyzer always turning out to be right, but I cannot wrap
my head around this one. Does anyone here see what the problem is ?

Thank you in advance.

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Martyanoff
http://snowsyn.net
[email protected]
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.