[erlang-questions] Fwd: Suggestion: New Info item for process_info/2

[Edwin Fine]

Raimo,

I get what you are saying; thanks for the enlightenment. Still, I think if I
had a list of available data points (and you could create the
process_info_items() call only to return the interesting ones, possibly), I
could display them to the user, who could decide, no, that one is ugly and I
won't select it for display. Isn't it better to give a choice and have
someone refuse it, that to deny it to them? I don't know. It's just a
thought.

On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 3:35 AM, Raimo Niskanen <
raimo+erlang-questions@REDACTED<raimo%2Berlang-questions@REDACTED>>
wrote:

> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 01:13:38PM -0400, Edwin Fine wrote:
> > LOL. I probably deserved that. Thanks for the replies - SOMEONE is out
> > there!
> >
> > Matt, the solution is workable, and I avoid pain as much as the next guy,
> > but I really want to have something that will TELL me what all the valid
> > process_info items are. process_info/1 only gives me SOME of them and is
> for
> > debugging only.
> >
> > Ok, then; here's a suggestion:
> >
> > Erlang team, How about adding an info item of "all" for process_info/2?
> It
> > won't break the interface, and it will allow people like me to "query"
> > process_info for which items are valid.
>
> We have thought of an 'all' item for process_info/2, but
> all items includes very strange and specialized ones,
> we are not proud of all of them, plus some are heavy
> to produce and some give duplicate information.
>
> Therefore we have more or less concluded that anyone
> who wants all items does not want all items, just
> all the ones that are interesting, and beleive me
> you are not interested in getting all of the
> items process_info/2 can produce, especially not
> all it will be able to produce in the future.
>
> Use your handcoded list, the chance an item will be removed
> is small, but to be prepared for that you can call process_info/2
> in a loop and shield it with a try .. catch block.
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Edwin Fine
> >
> > On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 5:01 AM, Matthias Lang <matthias@REDACTED>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Edwin Fine writes:
> > >
> > >  > I don't know if my first post just didn't make it, or got ignored
> > > because I
> > >  > inadvertently offended someone, or perhaps it asked too boring a
> > >  > question.
> > >
> > > I thought "the guy's figured out a perfectly workable solution but is
> > > tying himself in knots to avoid using it because it doesn't seem
> > > painful enough." Either that, or he hasn't managed to explain what he
> > > really wants to do.
> > >
> > > Matt
> > >
> > >
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > erlang-questions mailing list
> > erlang-questions@REDACTED
> > http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
> --
>
> / Raimo Niskanen, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20080516/ca241ff7/attachment.htm>