Wow, I never thought I would have a philosophy question about documentation.
Should I be documenting semantics that will be stable across all[1] releases? Or observable behavior in the release you, dear developer, have in your hands right now? Or, perhaps, both ? I'll tell you, as a developer, I would certainly want to know exactly what's going to happen when I call put() and send() with this release. ------------------------------ [1] for sufficiently small values of "all". > What I said was put is *allowed* to send optimistically, not that it is > required to. It actually did send optimistically in a previous version of > the code, however I commented that line out. > > I would say the documented semantics of put and send should allow the > implementation the flexibility to do any of the following: > > 1) optimistically transmit whatever it can everytime so long as it > doesn't block > 2) never bother transmitting anything until you force it to by calling > send > 3) anything in between the first two, e.g. magically transmit once you've > put enough messages to reach the optimal batch size > > The reason for the behaviour you are observing is that we currently do > option 2 in the C impl, however we've done option 1 in the past (and I > think we do option 1 still in the Java impl), and we will probably do > option 3 in the future.
