- Original Message -
From: Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu
To: proton@qpid.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2013 2:27:19 PM
Subject: Re: put vs. send
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 7:35 AM, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/06/2013 10:09 AM, Rafael Schloming wrote
I like this. I don't think this is the same thing as high level conceptual
intro, but may well be more useful right now, and it will always be very
useful as recipe book style documentation.
I think this is actually quite helpful for the ongoing API discussions. One
of the tricky things about
- Original Message -
I like this.
Good! I'm trying to get at the intention, as I understood it from
online discussions, and make a doc that makes the intention easy
to see.
I don't think this is the same thing as high level
conceptual
intro, but may well be more useful right
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Michael Goulish mgoul...@redhat.com wrote:
I think this is actually quite helpful for the ongoing API
discussions. One
of the tricky things about developing a simple API is that everyone
has
their own scenario that they want to be simple, and sometimes
Hah!
I think I get it!
Your comments about asynchronicity were the key.
Rewriting now.
- Original Message -
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Michael Goulish mgoul...@redhat.com
wrote:
- Original Message -
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:20 PM, Rafael Schloming
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 March 2013 21:10, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com wrote:
[.. snip ..]
It isn't really possible to have put cause messages to be eventually
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 5:15 AM, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com 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
On 6 March 2013 13:26, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 March 2013 21:10, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com wrote:
[.. snip ..]
It
Whether that's reported as an error is really a choice of the bindings. In
C it's all just return codes. We could add a separate non-blocking flag
that causes the blocking operations to return distinct error codes, i.e.
the equivalent of EWOULDBLOCK, but I don't think this makes a whole lot
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 6:37 AM, Rob Godfrey rob.j.godf...@gmail.com wrote:
Whether that's reported as an error is really a choice of the bindings.
In
C it's all just return codes. We could add a separate non-blocking flag
that causes the blocking operations to return distinct error
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/06/2013 08:30 AM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 5:15 AM, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com wrote:
This is exactly right. The API
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Rajith Attapattu rajit...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/06/2013 08:30 AM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 5:15
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Michael Goulish mgoul...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
- Original Message -
From: Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com
To: proton@qpid.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2013 10:35:47 AM
Subject: Re: put vs. send
On 03
On 03/05/2013 02:01 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Michael Goulish mgoul...@redhat.comwrote:
So, am I understanding correctly? -- I should be able to get messages
from my sender to my receiver just by calling put() -- if the receiver
is ready to receive?
Not
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Michael Goulish mgoul...@redhat.comwrote:
quoth Rafi:
The semantics of pn_messenger_put allow it to send if it can do so
without
blocking.
So, am I understanding correctly? -- I
On 03/05/2013 02:14 PM, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
This is a good explanation that we need to put in the docs, as
Application developers certainly need to know how it behaves.
If one were to use the current C impl, it certainly gives the
impression that put() is meant to write messages into your
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/05/2013 02:14 PM, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
This is a good explanation that we need to put in the docs, as
Application developers certainly need to know how it behaves.
If one were to use the current C impl, it certainly
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/05/2013 02:01 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Michael Goulish mgoul...@redhat.com
wrote:
So, am I understanding correctly? -- I should be able to get messages
from my sender to my
- Original Message -
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/05/2013 02:01 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Michael Goulish
mgoul...@redhat.com
wrote:
So, am I understanding correctly? -- I should be able to
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:20 PM, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Rajith Attapattu rajit...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/05/2013 02:14 PM, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
This is a good
- Original Message -
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:20 PM, Rafael Schloming r...@alum.mit.edu
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Rajith Attapattu
rajit...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/05/2013 02:14 PM, Rajith
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Michael Goulish mgoul...@redhat.comwrote:
- Original Message -
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Ted Ross tr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/05/2013 02:01 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Michael Goulish
22 matches
Mail list logo
