Yeah not sure why someone's first reaction to seeing 150ms Rust hot-patches is to call it BS and a "pain-in-the-ass." Tough crowd.

We could aim lower, or make it entirely automatic. The first prototype was entirely automatic, but I realized that you definitely need to signal to the program to hot-reload.

For code like:

```rust

while true {

    let msg = io.poll();

```

you're now stuck because the program is hung on a syscall. Doesn't matter if you hot-patch the loop, the program is stuck. My first prototype used the exception tables to unwind the program, but that didn't work on WASM and led to weird issues with cancellation and effects.

Similar issues with one-time initialization code at the beginning of the program. You could just hot-patch from `main` - basically restarting the program - but the whole point of hot-patching is that you can keep as much state around as possible while also changing its behavior.

For most apps, you just need one `subsecond::call()` and it works. The bevy folks wrote a `#[hot]` macro which we might integrate, but I'm also keen for frameworks to just adopt it and/or distribute a simple universal adapter.

It’s a developer tool to speed up rust iteration, not a production tool like erlang.

That being said, bevy is using bevy-reflect to implement proper struct hot-reloading between hot-patches.

The challenge is that if the program is busy in a spin loop, there's no way to preempt it and modify it. Things like malloc, spin loops, network requests, syscalls etc.

I looked into liveplusplus a lot and their unreal integration also requires a broker to get the most out of it. If you're building a game engine and want to support struct layout and alignment changes, you'll need to do some re-instancing. Hiding a `subsecond::call` deep in the bowels of the host framework hides it from the user and lets the framework handle any complicated state management it needs during hotpatches.

I wouldn't say it's purity - the first version of subsecond actually did do in-process modification - but after playing around with it for a while, I much preferred the light runtime integration. The dioxus integration was about 5 lines of code, so it's quite minimal.

You basically need to wrap your program's `tick()` function. Otherwise you might be in the middle of malloc, hot-patch, and your struct's layout and alignment changes, and your program crashes due to undefined behavior.

The goal is that frameworks just bake `subsecond::current` into their `tick()` function and end-users get hot-patching for free.

There's a custom `axum::serve` equivalent we built that wraps the router construction in a hot-patchable function. When the patches are loaded, we reset the TCP connections.

It's a little specific to how dioxus uses axum today, but we plan to release an axum-only integration in the future.