You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Describe the bug
unicode support for atoms in asserts is inconsistent. With erl +pc unicode some macroses print atoms in errors correctly, some not. I think it is the issue with the ?? expansion in macroses in general.
I think this is in order to generate the same result for latin1 and utf8 files. I'll leave figuring out of it is a wanted behaviour or not to others :)
Describe the bug
unicode support for atoms in asserts is inconsistent. With
erl +pc unicode
some macroses print atoms in errors correctly, some not. I think it is the issue with the??
expansion in macroses in general.To Reproduce
in the
erl +pc unicode
shell:Result:
Expected behavior
Affected versions
at least OTP 27
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: