Berin Loritsch wrote:
Peter Donald wrote:
Remember this is dequeue().
The Sink side of the equation is active, and therefore a call to pop events
off the queue would block if the timeout was set.
The Source side of the equation is passive, and therefore a call to push
events on the queue never block, but will throw an exception unless
tryEnqueue() is called.
In essence, enqueue() can assert backpressure if the queue is not emptied
or processed quick enough. Dequeue can block until there are actual
events to dequeue ( or there are X events to dequeue in the case of
dequeue( X ) ).
I will merge the interfaces with some of the ideas talked about today, and
let me know if you like it better....
I committed a less cluttered queue interface, which should be cleaner
than the SEDA version, and more semantically correct. I also took your
advice regarding virtualization.
I am particularly interested if you are satisfied with the setTimeOut()
method, or if you would rather a different approach.
--
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
