On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Endre Varga endre.va...@typesafe.com
wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 10:02 PM, Viktor Klang viktor.kl...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 9:40 PM, David Hotham david.hot...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Of course it's normal and expected that a
Awesome contribution David, thanks a lot!
We'll think of a plan on how to include or replace the old impl with your
PR and ping that issue again soon :-)
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 4:08 PM, David Hotham david.hot...@googlemail.com
wrote:
I've submitted a first stab at an implementation at pull
It occurs to me that I wasn't completely clear:
- Of course the priority mailbox must break message ordering in some
general sense. Else it wouldn't be a priority mailbox at all!
- But it is highly surprising to me that it should break ordering for
messages of equal priority between
Of course it's normal and expected that a PriorityQueue returns equal
priority elements in arbitrary order. That's just how heaps work. However
that doesn't imply that a mailbox has to do the same thing!
For instance, I guess that it shouldn't be very hard for the mailbox to
maintain a
Hi David,
yes, I can definitely understand that it can be surprising, but I wouldn't
call it a bug -per se-, since it is not a promise that was violated.
If you happen to have, or come by, a performant version of a PriorityQueue
with the semantics you described, please don't hesitate to share
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 9:40 PM, David Hotham david.hot...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Of course it's normal and expected that a PriorityQueue returns equal
priority elements in arbitrary order. That's just how heaps work. However
that doesn't imply that a mailbox has to do the same thing!
