[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Joshua Allen scripsit:
> Overall, I think the tradeoff is good for two reasons. First is that
> it makes things easier for the 80% of programmers (80% of whom still
> haven't done any XML programming yet :-)). Second, the things like
> buffer synchronization, worker threads, and so on are risks to platform
> stability and performance if done incorrectly. The code example above
> is a nice, tight, loop -- it is hard for users to screw it up in a way
> that hurts the overall system. And while that means that vendors like
> MSFT bear more direct responsibility for any threading/buffering issues,
> it also means that we have more direct control over these issues and can
> presumably fix or improve better. It also means that we can do work in
> the runtime and programming model to make it a lot easier for component
> vendors to get their own optimized async/buffering (or even some naïve
> version "for free"), all while hiding this from most developers.
Welcome to Unix pipelines. It's been a long, long route back home.
"Distributed coarse-grained data flow rulez!"
--me
--
John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
http://www.ccil.org/~cowan http://www.reutershealth.com
Charles li reis, nostre emperesdre magnes,
Set anz totz pleinz ad ested in Espagnes.
|
