Ah, just realized that I could make the init_node and the ring_node the same if I multiplied the message counter out with N*M initially, had each node decrement before passing, and then gracefully die if the counter is < N (meaning it is on its last circuit). Refactor, refactor, refactor.
I handled the stitching of the endpoints without a new message. You could argue that I cheated, but it works since erlang seems to hold the message for a process until it exists (confirmed by adding a sleep before the last node() call). I also counted messages at each node individually which simplified things a bit. Not sure which way I like better.
(sorry, can't use <pre> in a comment) -module(conc2). -export([start/2, make_node/2, node/3]).
Ah, just realized that I could make the init_node and the ring_node the same if I multiplied the message counter out with N*M initially, had each node decrement before passing, and then gracefully die if the counter is < N (meaning it is on its last circuit). Refactor, refactor, refactor.
ReplyDeleteI handled the stitching of the endpoints without a new message. You could argue that I cheated, but it works since erlang seems to hold the message for a process until it exists (confirmed by adding a sleep before the last node() call). I also counted messages at each node individually which simplified things a bit. Not sure which way I like better.
ReplyDelete(sorry, can't use <pre> in a comment)
-module(conc2).
-export([start/2, make_node/2, node/3]).
node(Id, _, 0) ->
io:format("Node ~p exiting~n", [Id]),
true;
node(Id, Next, Num_rem) ->
receive
M ->
io:format("Node ~p got msg (~p left)~n", [Id, Num_rem - 1]),
Next ! M,
node(Id, Next, Num_rem - 1)
end.
make_node(1, NMsgs) ->
spawn(conc2, node, [1, self(), NMsgs]);
make_node(NNodes, NMsgs) ->
spawn(conc2, node, [NNodes, make_node(NNodes - 1, NMsgs), NMsgs]).
start(NNodes, NMsgs) ->
First = spawn(conc2, node,
[NNodes - 1, make_node(NNodes - 2, NMsgs), NMsgs]),
First ! yo,
%%timer:sleep(1000),
node(NNodes, First, NMsgs).