News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Going Serverless: AWS and Compelling Science Fiction by mdergosits on Friday November 11, 2016 @04:52PM (#12934804)
Wouldn't loop detection be equivalent to solving the halting problem? Obviously a naive approach would be disallow recursion/ mutual recursion, but there are valid use cases for those that may not result in infinite execution
Re:Going Serverless: AWS and Compelling Science Fiction by harlanji on Friday November 11, 2016 @05:30PM (#12935091)
I helped design a large scale JS execution engine. We used Babel to rewrite code with loops that could be interrupted by our system. Eg. `for(...){mycode();}` would be recompiled to `for(...){if(!running()){halt();}mycode();}`. The technical reason is that tight loops wouldn't respond to SIGINT, if I recall correctly. So while it doesn't stop infinite loops, it can control the program. I wasn't involved in productionizing it.
Re:Going Serverless: AWS and Compelling Science Fiction by duaneb on Friday November 11, 2016 @08:31PM (#12936028)
Sorry--couldn't be interrupted by SIGINT? That's arguably the point of signals. Does the runtime just queue signals rather than respond in the signal handler itself?
Re:Going Serverless: AWS and Compelling Science Fiction by dllthomas on Friday November 11, 2016 @06:40PM (#12935491)
As I understand it, this is mutual recursion accross services, which is a much more specific case. Forbidding it may be viable.