[erlang-questions] the supervisor_bridge behaviour
Wed May 6 15:06:43 CEST 2009
Another way of saying it could be:
Even if you have an already existing application, that is not using OTP
supervisors, you can still make it look like it is, if you ''hide'' it
under a supervisor_bridge.
Does that make it clearer?
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 14:51 +0200, Gamoto wrote:
> The documentation says to use this behaviour for:
> "a process which connects a subsystem not designed according to the OTP design principles to a supervision tree"
> Could you explain with other terms ?
> If the sub-system is a set of processus which listen tcp/ip sockets, must the supervisor be of this type ?
> erlang-questions mailing list
More information about the erlang-questions