Function overriding at compile time

What do you mean by overload?

Using super. Sorry isn’t overload the word? Overrid is probably closer to what i think

Using super is the OO way to call parent object. That is not really working like this because there is no object in Elixir, just modules, functions and arguments. Composition is also preferred over inheritance… composition everywhere

@kokolegorille but if I have a funtion foo and juste want to overrid it, to print some log. Should i use something else than Kernel.super ?

You have to call super explicitly.

But it seems as if you want to use something known as decorators. I’ve seen an experimental package for those years ago, not sure if it still works or is maintained.

At least I remember it had problems with multi headed functions.

The easiest is probably to simply call the logger explicitly at the places you need it…

Maybe like this

def foo, do: ...

def foo_with_log do
  log_here
  foo()
end

I know it’s not override like You want… but You can easily compose functions.

I’m not supposed to write anything in the module A. So a client would go:

 defmodule A do
   def foo, do: ...
 end

and under the hood it would compile like

 defmodule A do
   def foo, do:stuff1
   def foo, do:stuff2and stuff1
 end

And my main problem is that i don’t know the name and arity of foo function. So it’s acutally hard to have any simple strategy like @kokolegorille suggested.

Or better probably this

def foo(x, y, z) do
  log_stuff(...)
  do_foo(x, y, z)
end

defp do_foo(...)...

This way only the decorator is accessible and doesn’t have an obfuscated name.

You neither know how the function will be named nor what arguments it might get? What do you actually want to log then?

The log was just an example. Its just some callbacks