| ▲ | quadruple 2 hours ago | |
> The BEAM's "let it crash" philosophy takes the opposite approach. Instead of anticipating every failure mode, you write the happy path and let processes crash. The supervisor detects the crash and restarts the process in a clean state. The rest of the system continues unaffected. Do I want this? If my request fails because the tool doesn't have a DB connection, I want the model to receive information about that error. If the LLM API returns an error because the conversation is too long, I want to run compacting or other context engineering strategies, I don't want to restart the process just to run into the same thing again. Am I misunderstanding Elixir's advantage here? | ||
| ▲ | dumpsterdiver 2 hours ago | parent [-] | |
Especially now that those workloads might have something to say about it… e.g. “Why did you make me this way?” | ||