Re: Opinions wanted: A superset of regular Erlang for type checking and deduction
Nicolas Martyanoff <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.erlang.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Is there a reason not to use the already existing type definitions and annotations ? They are already gradual, since you are not forced to annotate everything, you have total control on the granularity (you can use any() as much as you want), and they do not require introducing what is in practice a new language (which would requires new parsers in code editors, new tools, etc.). While getting Dialyzer to the state of the art would be fantastic, writing a totally new type checker based on the same annotations would work as well, and would avoid having to maintain any type of compatibility with the current behaviour of Dialyzer. If you work on that subject, feel free to contact me in PM, I would be happy to test your work on my codebases. -- Nicolas Martyanoff http://snowsyn.net [email protected]