[erlang-questions] embedded timeouts

[Bartłomiej Puzoń]

Yes, it is an intended behaviour. The receive's "after" closure applies if and only if there is no message to match
for the receive construct within a given amount of time.


----- "info" <info@REDACTED> escribió:

> The problem is that the "after Timeout" closure is never called. The
> loop never stops !
> John
> 
> info wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > Why the first timeout never happens ?
> 
> Does the function in init/1 receive a message?
> If it does, and loop/1 is called, it is no longer inside
> the receive clause, and the 'after' clause will not
> execute (it simply means, do this if no message has arrived
> within Timeout milliseconds).
> 
> If no message is sent to the receive clause in init/1,
> loop() will never be called.
> 
> BR,
> Ulf W
> 
> > How must be structured this code in order to have two timeouts ?
> > 
> > init(Timeout)- >
> >    receive
> >      ...
> >      loop(),
> >      after Timeout - >
> >      ...
> >    end.
> > 
> > loop()- >
> >    ...
> >    send(Message),
> >    receive after 1000 - > 0 end
> > loop().
> > 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ulf Wiger
> CTO, Erlang Solutions Ltd, formerly Erlang Training & Consulting Ltd
> http://www.erlang-solutions.com

-- 
Bartłomiej Puzoń
Erlang Solutions
bartlomiej.puzon@REDACTED