[erlang-questions] A possible problem with the canonical listener idiom

[Serge Aleynikov]

Steve Vinoski wrote:
> Also, I don't believe inet:setopts sets the controlling process,
> judging from the Erlang source code, but I'm sure someone will correct
> me if I'm wrong.

There's no documentation supporting the fact that inet:setopts(S, 
[{active, N}]) call is claimed to set the controlling process.  Its mere 
purpose is to tell the driver *how* to enforce message delivery rather 
than *where to*. gen_{tcp,udp}:controlling_process/2 is used for setting 
the controlling process (i.e. the recipient of actively delivered messages).

Serge