Adding more detail, this is just stub code, may actually not compile, but
just for illustration:
class A extends Actor {
val cache = Agent(42)
val backend: ActorRef // reference to the backend
def receive: Receive = {
case Read = cache.future() pipeTo sender
case
Hi,
In general I would consider Agents to be an advanced feature. It might be
tempting to use them since they look simple but I recommend using Actors
instead whenever it is possible. While there are important use-cases of
Agents they are for fairly specific scenarios.
-Endre
On Thu, Feb 27,
Hello,
If you do the following:
future1 map { r = agent.send(1) }
future2 map { r = agent.send(2) }
The order of the sends will be determined by the length of future1 and
future2.
I would expect something like
agent.sendOff(future1 map { r = 1 })
agent.sendOff(future2 map { r = 2 })
In a way
For example:
f1 map { result = agent.send(1) }
f2 map { result = agent.send(2) }
The order of the sends depends on how long f1 and f2 take.
I would like an API similar to sendOff, accepting futures:
agent.sendOff(f1 map { 1 })
agent.sendOff(f2 map { 2 })
In this way, the results of f1 and f2
27 feb 2014 kl. 02:34 skrev partyco...@gmail.com:
Hello,
If you do the following:
future1 map { r = agent.send(1) }
future2 map { r = agent.send(2) }
The order of the sends will be determined by the length of future1 and
future2.
Yes, but why should that matter given that you don’t
Hi partycoder,
in which way does your code cause an ordering problem? What do you observe and
why is that not as it should be?
Regards,
Roland
12 feb 2014 kl. 06:36 skrev partyco...@gmail.com:
Hello,
I have a question.
val f = some future
val a = Agent(some type)
// This may cause
