aethereus
An irrelevant question, there are function names like Integer.is_odd, and there are function names like Enum.empty?, why the two different naming styles?
Trending in Questions
I having some trouble figuring out if I have set myself too strict of standards for my production server. Currently I can handle 75% of r...
New
Hello,
I’m trying to build a basic Phoenix web-app, and I’d like to use Tailwind.
However, when I launch mix phx.server, I get an error...
New
Hi everyone,
I am toying with the idea of building a “match maker” for giving personal help to people that wants to start coding.
I sta...
New
I’m working on a small exercise involving update_in/3, and I came up with this solution:
data = %{
name: "Periodic Table",
category:...
New
I’ve got trouble wrapping my head around the order in which functions are called in this snippet (from Phoenix’s authentication):
toke...
New
Is there any way to avoid the Hologram compiler running when using iex? It seems like the front-end code could potentially be disregarded...
New
** (ArgumentError) expected :max_attempts to be a positive integer, got: {:@, [line: 10, column: 19], [{:max_attempts, [line: 10, column:...
New
Other Trending Topics
Edit: 2026 May 15 - This post is archived.
Mob is alive!!
Main docs: mob v0.7.11 — Documentation
A bit of explanation for the slightly c...
New
I am happy to introduce the very α version of the new programming language compiled to BEAM.
Welcome Cure.
It has literally three kille...
New
Hobbes is a low-level distributed database for the Elixir programming language.
Hobbes provides a simple, safe, and scalable storage lay...
New
A little off-topic, but I feel like people here have a good head on their shoulders.
I used to be quite good at making software. Was luc...
New
Hey. Is there anyone here who creates agents in their apps? Not talking about using agents, but creating them. I’m finding it pretty diff...
New
ExRatatui lets you cook up rich terminal UIs in Elixir, powered by Rust’s ratatui via Rustler NIFs. Build interactive terminal applicatio...
New
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Popular Tags
- #ecto
- #liveview
- #troubleshooting
- #learning-elixir
- #library
- #deployment
- #erlang
- #testing
- #genserver
- #mix
- #absinthe
- #remote-other
- #otp
- #plug
- #how-to-question
- #macros
- #postgres
- #elixirconf
- #channels
- #exunit
- #discussion
- #code-sync
- #podcasts
- #javascript
- #onsite
- #dialyzer
- #docker
- #authentication
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ai
- #ecto-query
- #elixirconf-us
- #blog-post
- #elixir-ls
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #graphql
- #genstage
- #websockets
- #supervisor
- #advent-of-code
- #distillery
- #processes
- #elixirconf-eu
- #api
- #forms
- #metaprogramming
- #hex










Showing Posts 1 to 4- Show Best Posts
- Show All (oldest first)
- Show All (newest first)
mjadczak
Traditionally, Erlang uses
is_xxxfor functions which return a boolean value. In particular, functions which can be used in guards, of which many are indeedis_xxxfunctions, were taken wholesale into Elixir from Erlang. Currently, in Elixir, theis_xxxformat serves as an indicator that a function / method can be used inside a guard. SinceInteger.is_odd/1is a macro which can be placed into a guard, it also follows this convention. Most other Elixir functions which return a boolean value, such asEnum.empty?/1cannot be placed in guards, and follow the normal Elixirxxx?naming convention.aethereus
But non-boolean guard-friendly functions such as
divandremdo not have such indicator, why should boolean functions be a special case? For fresh Elixir programmers, remembering different naming styles can be a burden, so why not usexxx?style exclusively?christhekeele
Because not having a way to recognize the special-case guard-enabled functions would be more confusing to new-comers.
Guards are used much, much more often than they are created—they are possibly typed out more than any other function or macro,
ifanddefincluded. This is especially true of theis_type-check guards since they are the only way to switch on type information, in or outside function heads. So you will rapidly become fluent with this special casing.We want new-comers to learn fast and well the fact that you can’t throw just any predicate function into a guard. Accepting the cognitive burden of remembering which functions are allowed in guards is far more important than the burden of remembering to use a different naming style when writing them, and if they were named identically it would be much harder to memorize which is which for the first time.
Additionally, this naming difference helps visibility and discoverability: we want these special cases to stand out in documentation, we want people like you to notice the discrepancy and take note of it like you have here, instead of frustratedly filing bug reports about how only some predicates seem to work in guards.
So I think it has proved an effective decision.
michalmuskala
As a side note, this convention is explained in the Naming Conventions doc page.