What about:Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:Andy Lewis wrote:I still like the concept of "waiting" a lot more. In short, your 'server' is waiting for you to come back. It would be like having your personal thread allocated in the server, even if this is not the case.what about I/O terms? sendPageBlocking sendPageNonBlocking
sendNextPage
sendLastPage
The first implies a continuation (no pun intended) of a sequence of pages. The second implies the end of a sequence of pages. Why wait?
Coming from page foo1:
doItem1();
sendNextPage(foo2);
doItem2();
sendNextPage(foo3);
doItemN();
sendNextPage(fooN);
finishProcessing();
sendLastPage();
doNecessaryCleanupAndPostprocessing();
You're not waiting. From the conceptual level of the flow script, you're just doing the next item on the list. The fact that sendNextPage blocks or takes more time to finish seems to me like a side effect, not a focus. You're not waiting for the wait to end. You're waiting for the function to end. It just so happens that the function blocks internally until an (implementation dependent) event to occur. Wasn't that the point of the flow system: to make logic fit conceptually into a natural sequence?
After all, it's
ServerSocket ss = new ServerSocket(80);
Socket s = ss.accept();
and not
ServerSocket ss = new ServerSocket(80);
Socket s = ss.waitForIncomingConnectionUnlessTimeout();
Thoughts?
- Miles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
