[erlang-questions] Poll: How do you handle spurious messages?
Wed Aug 6 18:48:32 CEST 2014
Matter of taste. If you like designs where unidentified messages circulate
in your system and endless debugging sessions for race conditions, missed
messaged, deadlocks etc. is your thing, ignoring messages is cool.
If you're not good at this type of debugging or simple don't have the time
for it consider tightening your design and eliminate any kind of slack from
the system, then crash for anything that breaks the contract.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Loïc Hoguin <> wrote:
> On 08/06/2014 04:55 PM, Peer Stritzinger wrote:
>> 1. log the messages
> For the few processes that can receive more than
> calls/casts/monitors/exits I want to know what's being dropped in case it's
> something important.
> 3. Ignore them without trace?
> For everything else, which is the majority of the processes.
> *Never* crash. Because if you do, then you can easily mess up your system
> through the shell (like using sys:get_state on a normal process, kaboom).
> Loïc Hoguin
> erlang-questions mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions