Hacker News Reader

> Your function code is cleaner, simpler, and easier to maintain.

I don't think your post covers the nuances. "Not a correct implementation"? We weren't trying for lowest latency, we were trying for highest reliability / simplest code / easiest to test. How do you test that your reused connections handle the "timed out right as next request comes in" case?

View on HN

I mean not correct in the literal sense. It's not about reliability nor simplicity nor testability - the code is wrong. It has a bug. The code is written without understanding that lambda containers can be re-used, thus, it's exhausting a finite resource unintentionally.

You handle the "timed out right as next request comes in" case by memoizing the connection in a variable and checking if it's null in the handler. If it is, re-establish the connection.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com