How to find out what's going on

Joel Reymont joelr1@REDACTED
Wed Jan 4 01:40:25 CET 2006

I'm sure that I did not make any copy/paste mistakes. Indeed, the  
lines are printed in reverse order but could it be that disk_log does  
not guarantee the order? I did not look at the disk_log code but it  
seems more likely that the terms were logged in reverse order.

The printout is from opening the disk log and printing all entries  
where pid is the one that I'm looking for.

On Jan 4, 2006, at 12:36 AM, Per Hedeland wrote:

>> 	    trace(Bot, 90, "Received: ~.6. fs: ~p",
>> 		  [Seconds, Cmd1]),
>> 	    trace(Bot, 80, "Received: ~.6. fs: ~p",
>> 		  [Seconds, element(1, Cmd1)]);
> Hm, are you sure? Seems to me the that if the first line was logged
> by the first trace call, the second trace call would have caused a
> badarg (from element(1, srv_table_state)). I.e. unless you did some
> copy'n'paste mistake here, it's more likely that the first line is
> logged by the second trace call, and the second line is logged by the
> first trace call the next time you run through this particular  
> piece of
> code - we sure don't know what happened in between.:-)
> --Per Hedeland


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list