Elixir/Erlang Hot Swapping Code (2016)
kennyballou.com
Elixir/Erlang Hot Swapping Code (2016)
1–10 of 119 posts
Re: Elixir/Erlang Hot Swapping Code (2016)
#2Re: Elixir/Erlang Hot Swapping Code (2016)
#3Re: Elixir/Erlang Hot Swapping Code (2016)
#4i'm so sick of this DevOps bullshit i wonder if there is an alternative language that you can hot swap code and do all the black magic stuff while keeping the reliability and performance like Rust.
Re: Elixir/Erlang Hot Swapping Code (2016)
#5in actual production, people prefer to operate at the container level + traffic management, and dont touch anything deeper than the container
Re: Elixir/Erlang Hot Swapping Code (2016)
#6i'm so sick of this DevOps bullshit i wonder if there is an alternative language that you can hot swap code and do all the black magic stuff while keeping the reliability and performance like Rust.
I am shocked at the idea of anyone implying that Erlang is "unreliable"... it's entire reason for existence was to step up the game on reliability.
Re: Elixir/Erlang Hot Swapping Code (2016)
#7i'm so sick of this DevOps bullshit i wonder if there is an alternative language that you can hot swap code and do all the black magic stuff while keeping the reliability and performance like Rust.
what happened? :D
Re: Elixir/Erlang Hot Swapping Code (2016)
#8Re: Elixir/Erlang Hot Swapping Code (2016)
#9Does this hot swapping also work for closures?
If you have something_function, then first inline function used in it will be -something_function/1-fun-0- with zero being the index and captured variable being another argument. Now if you will change the host function to have more inlines before it, the indexing will drift.
So I would expect the body of inline function will still be resolved from the old version of the module, but I didn't actually try.
Source: I did run erlc -S at least once.
Add: now thinking of it, will the call to a local function from the old version of the module ever escape into the new one without first returning back to gen_server and letting it call the new version? Another comment says that calls withing the module never do, so the assumption was correct.