On 03/06/2013 08:30 AM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 5:15 AM, Ted Ross <[email protected]> wrote:
This is exactly right. The API behaves in a surprising way and causes
reasonable programmers to write programs that don't work. For the sake of
adoption, we should fix this, not merely document it.
This seems like a bit of a leap to me. Have we actually seen anyone
misusing or abusing the API due to this? Mick didn't come across it till I
pointed it out and even then he had to construct an experiment where he's
basically observing the over-the-wire behaviour in order to detect it.
--Rafael
The following code doesn't work:
while (True) {
wait_for_and_get_next_event(&event);
pn_messenger_put(event);
}
If I add a send after every put, I'm going to limit my maximum message
rate. If I amortize my sends over every N puts, I may have
arbitrarily/infinitely high latency on messages if the source of events
goes quiet.
I guess I'm questioning the mission of the Messenger API. Which is the
more important design goal: general-purpose ease of use, or strict
single-threaded asynchrony?
-Ted
