From 14054d1975945b9fb5c1c9e9d8dc28c8339e0466 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Linus Nordberg Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2019 23:37:58 +0200 Subject: use a list comprehension in the place of lists:map/2 map/2 does _not_ risk reordering the list. The comment "The evaluation order depends on the implementation." in the documentation refers only to in which order fun is applied. A list comprehension looks a little bit nicer though, IMO. --- p11p-daemon/src/p11p_remote_manager.erl | 9 ++++----- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/p11p-daemon/src/p11p_remote_manager.erl b/p11p-daemon/src/p11p_remote_manager.erl index d2bbd11..b9b15b2 100644 --- a/p11p-daemon/src/p11p_remote_manager.erl +++ b/p11p-daemon/src/p11p_remote_manager.erl @@ -84,11 +84,10 @@ handle_call({client_change, client_gone, [TokName, Pid]}, From, #state{tokens = gen_server:stop(Pid), #{TokName := Token} = Tokens, Remotes = Token#token.remotes, - NewRemotes = lists:map(fun(E) -> % TODO: any risk of losing list order? - case E#remote.pid of - Pid -> E#remote{pid = undefined}; - _ -> E - end end, Remotes), + NewRemotes = [case E#remote.pid of + Pid -> E#remote{pid = undefined}; + _ -> E + end || E <- Remotes], NewToken = Token#token{remotes = NewRemotes}, NewState = State#state{tokens = Tokens#{TokName := NewToken}}, {reply, ok, NewState}; -- cgit v1.1