[erlang-questions] gen_statem: next event internal and reply

Peter Morgan peter.james.morgan@REDACTED
Tue Aug 6 13:22:29 CEST 2019

Hi Raimo,

> On 31 Jul 2019, at 13:36, Raimo Niskanen <raimo+erlang-questions@REDACTED> wrote:
> I have checked in a branch in the daily builds that clarifies
> the documentation for transition_option() to be more explicit
> about when replies are sent, and some other stuff.
> / Raimo

Thanks very much for this. Making the documented reply order more explicit would be perfect. I found a couple of instances of:

{keep_state_and_data, [nei(work), {reply, From, ok}]};


{keep_state_and_data, [{reply, From, ok}, nei(work)]};

Where the _assumption_ was that the order would be honoured (it is a list!). In the majority of cases that I’ve found it didn't matter - in one case the call was immediately followed by a terminate_child on that process, causing (sometimes) an unclean shutdown.

BTW - We’ve not seen any async timer related issues in 22 that we were seeing in earlier 21s. Thanks again for your speedy help on that issue too, much appreciated!


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list