[erlang-questions] gen_tcp:recv and hairloss

Kevin q2h46uw02@REDACTED
Mon Nov 10 21:39:30 CET 2008

> .... this and see what happens:
> ....() ->
>    {ok,LS} = gen_tcp:listen(7000,[binary,{active,false}]),
>    {ok,Sock} = gen_tcp:accept(LS),
>    spawn(fun() ->  do_recv(Sock) end),
>    spawn(fun() ->  do_recv(Sock) end),
>    ok.
> do_recv(Socket) ->
>    io:format("Recv: ~p~n", [ gen_tcp:recv(Socket,0)]).
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

Point taken.  I solved my problem by simply embracing 
gen_fsm:sync_send_event, which I was probably
conceptually visualizing when I was using gen_fsm:send_event.

A lot of advice I got was to use gen_tcp:controlling_process, but 
doesn't my success with passing a socket
and reading in a Fsm, as well as the example above, show thats its a 
common myth that  you need to use controlling_process if you
wish to use gen_tcp:recv in a process that didn't accept the socket in 
the first place?  I believe you only need to use
controlling_process if you want the socket data sent as a erlang message 
to the process, and for that to happen it has to be {active, true}.

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list