On 30 July 2013 16:22, Casey Ransberger <[email protected]> wrote:
> I was thinking: if a system happens to be running an optimized version of > some algorithm, and hit a crash bug, what if it could fall back to the > suboptimal but conceptually simpler "Occam's explanation?" > This is something the Erlang folk have said repeatedly for a long time now. They claim that upon crashing, the idea of backing off and trying something simpler is part of the Erlang way. However, I don't recall seeing any concrete support for this in OTP. The simpler idea of supervisors and hierarchical crashing-and-restarting larger and larger subunits of the system seems to be what's actually predominantly used. Tony -- Tony Garnock-Jones [email protected] http://homepages.kcbbs.gen.nz/tonyg/
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
