[erlang-questions] Testing gen_statem timers

[Torben Hoffmann]

Hi Micael,

I'm very biassed here, but apart from my creator fondness many of my
colleagues are very happy about the approach that my Chronos library takes
when it comes to timers.

https://github.com/lehoff/chronos

Basically, don't use the internal timers, but do read the full README from
Chronos.

Very happy to assist you and improve anything in Chronos, if you find it
confusing.

Cheers,
Torben

On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 at 13:35, Micael Nussbaumer <micaelnussbaumer@REDACTED>
wrote:

> Hi, first time poster (but I've read many threads in here).
>
> How does one usually test gen_statem internal timer events?
> Usually you test the effects of the behaviour somehow, and I can test
> that. But in this particular case I had a situation where timers with uniq
> references are created, later on they usually get removed and all is fine -
> they're created for each extra worker started and at some point the worker
> is removed by the timer event that trigger checking some conditions.
>
> I noticed after that, the way I had written it, if an extra worker was
> started then died for some other reason than the timer event taking it out,
> I could theoretically accumulate timers that wouldn't be removed, I've
> since then corrected that but still I have no tests ensuring me that it
> actually works.
> So my question is if there's any even way to test it (even if with
> tracing)?
> Thanks
>
> *M*icael *N*ussbaumer
> artistic portfolio <http://cargocollective.com/micaelnussbaumer>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>


-- 
http://www.linkedin.com/in/torbenhoffmann
@LeHoff
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20190815/4a512d1f/attachment.htm>