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

[Peter Morgan]

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}]};

and:

{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!

Regards,
Peter.