It would also enable the testing of fatal conditions, which would be great.
-Kenny > On Jan 16, 2017, at 5:25 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On Jan 16, 2017, at 3:57 PM, David Waite via swift-evolution >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> My interpretation is that he was advocating a future where a precondition’s >> failure killed less than the entire process. Instead, shut down some smaller >> portion like a thread, actor, or container like .Net's app domains (which >> for those more familiar with Javascript could be loosely compared with Web >> Workers). >> >> Today - if you wanted a Swift server where overflowing addition didn’t >> interrupt your service for multiple users, you would need to use something >> like a pre-fork model (with each request handled by a separate swift process) >> >> That's the difference between CLI and desktop apps where the process is >> providing services for a single user, and a server where it may be providing >> a service for thousands or millions of users. > > Agreed, I’d also really like to see this some day. It seems like a natural > outgrowth of the concurrency model, if it goes the direction of actors. If > you’re interested, I speculated on this direction in this talk: > http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/files/us-lmandel/lattner.pdf > <http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/files/us-lmandel/lattner.pdf> > > -Chris > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
