Wed Apr 24 20:35:45 CEST 2002
Joe Armstrong <> wrote:
> I am now turning my attention to the Erlang start sequence itself.
> Does *anybody* understand (I mean *really* understand the
> Erlang start-boot sequence).
Yes, I'd like to think that I do (and I think that e.g. magnus does).
> Is all this junk in the .script files
> really necessary.
Well... of course this is just one solution to the problem, there are
> Do you think there would be any objections if I reworked it all?
Please make sure that you understand *everything* about how
script/boot files are used before changing this (I got the impression
from your question that you don't). It's very easy to fall into the
old trap "I don't understand this code, it looks complicated, it can't
be necessary, I'll remove it".
Also, I don't think it's very complicated. init.erl interprets the
boot script (which usually is generated by a tool like systools.erl)
A boot script for a complete product may look complicated, but
remember start_old.script? It was pretty small.
> Does anybody write their own .script files and make their own
> home rolled .boot files? - If so please mail me privatly.
Yes, Nortel does (by using the appropriate tools).
More information about the erlang-questions