ilya-kolpakov
I think the behavior of pattern matching on null-valued pairs within structs is surprising:
iex(6)> defmodule A do defstruct [:a, :b] end
iex(7)> match?(%A{a: a}, %A{})
true
iex(8)> match?(%{a: a}, %{})
false
I would argue this is not very useful. By matching on the struct itself (e.g. on %A{}) we already know the keys that are going to be present. Hence pattern-matching on members provides zero additional value.
IMO, it would be more useful if the above struct match returned false. Indeed, it would provide a way to test a semantical presence of a value rather than a mechanical one. This can be done via guards but the syntax is more verbose.
Trending in Discussions
Hey there,
It’s been more than a year since we started using LiveView as our main UI library and building a whole library of UI componen...
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
Hi everyone!
The first release candidate for the Expert language server project is now available!
We’ve published a press release detai...
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
Hi there! :wave:
@frigidcode and I (but mostly him) have been running an Elixir Book club, we’re almost done with Designing Elixir Syste...
New
I’ve been using Emacs as my main code editor for more than a two years. It’s a custom build version although I’ve tried doom emacs and sp...
New
I love Elixir. It’s one of 2 programming languages I’ve ever fallen in love with.
But I don’t use it anymore.
Serverless was the promis...
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
Hey, I’m Jesse and I’m the main contributor behind Dexter, a full-featured, lightning-fast Elixir LSP optimized for large codebases. It s...
New
Hobbes is a low-level distributed database for the Elixir programming language.
Hobbes provides a simple, safe, and scalable storage lay...
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
Just published claude-code-elixir, a plugin marketplace for Claude Code with Elixir support. These are the plugins I’ve been using for my...
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 10- Show Best Posts
- Show All (oldest first)
- Show All (newest first)
OvermindDL1
Or just straight out by testing the nil case first:
match?(%A{a: nil}, %A{})idi527
Or
!!%A{}.a… looks a bit like swearing.OvermindDL1
Wouldn’t work in a match context though? ^.^;
idi527
Oh, I thought the goal was to get a
false.ilya-kolpakov
Thanks for the suggestions. Indeed,
!!won’t work within a function signature unfortunately.benwilson512
It provides tons of value if you include a pattern on those members, or if you include those members in a guard.
Let’s filter all As that are empty
Ultimately the whole point of
match?is that it works exactly like:If you want some other characteristic then you want some other function.
We are more than happy to try to help provide the most idiomatic way to achieve whatever your goal is in this situation. Just understand that suggestions that involve breaking changes to core functions are unlikely to gain a lot of traction.
ilya-kolpakov
Ben, thanks a lot for your detailed answer. I was probably not clear enough about it, but I am not interested in
match?per se but rather in the design decision behind pattern matching implementation for structs. Given that I understand how structs are implemented I see that pattern matching works in a most straightforward way.OvermindDL1
That is entirely dictated by the BEAM VM itself.
As for structs, they act very much like ‘records’ from Erlang.
And to do something like having
match?(%A{a: a}, %A{})return false then it would have to have a guard, and guards introduce a non-trivial hit in processing time (doing<<_:binary>>is faster than doings when is_binary(s)for one example), which is dreadfully important at times.ilya-kolpakov
Not necessarily. One could forbid keeping
nilvalues in structs but keep the set of possible keys somewhere else (which, in turn, might be useful for defining the order of keys for instance).Interesting, I would not have guessed. Did you learn it by trying to optimize some code or by learning BEAM internals?
OvermindDL1
How would you do that?
A struct is just a map, so worst-case someone could just
Map.put(someStruct, :theKey, nil)…I came from the erlang world with a lot of network parsing, I’ve been working with the BEAM off and on for ~15 years I think now (early 2000’s). ^.^