Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
As Erlang is an almost pure functional programming language, I’d imagine this was possible:
case X of
foo(Z) -> ...
end.
where foo(Z) is a decidable-invertible pure (side-effect free) bijective function, e.g.:
foo(input) -> output.
Then, in the case that X = output, Z would match as input.
Is it possible to use such semantics, with or without other syntax than my example, in Erlang?
No, Erlang only supports literal patterns!
And your original request is not an easy one. Just because there is a an inverse doesn’t mean that it is easy to find. Practically it would that the compiler would have to make two versions of functions.