> You can still interact via return values. You should be thinking about
> a Deferred in the same way as you think about a function which returns
> a result synchronously. The Deferred represents the result, even though
> it isn't the result itself (since the result doesn't exist yet). Anything
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 08:05:13 -0800 (PST), koranthala
wrote:
On Jan 28, 8:36 pm, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
[snip]
Why isn't the return value of protocol.send propagated back to msg.send?
It sounds like it should be.
Jean-Paul
Thank you very much again Jean-Paul for helping me out.
I am una
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 10:05 AM, koranthala wrote:
> On Jan 28, 8:36 pm, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 06:30:32 -0800 (PST), koranthala
>> wrote:
>> >On Jan 28, 7:10 pm, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 02:02:57 -0800 (PST), koranthala
>> >> wrote:
>>
On Jan 28, 8:36 pm, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 06:30:32 -0800 (PST), koranthala
> wrote:
> >On Jan 28, 7:10 pm, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
> >> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 02:02:57 -0800 (PST), koranthala
> >> wrote:
> >> >On Jan 27, 9:27 pm, koranthala wrote:
> >> >> On Jan 27
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 06:30:32 -0800 (PST), koranthala
wrote:
On Jan 28, 7:10 pm, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 02:02:57 -0800 (PST), koranthala
wrote:
>On Jan 27, 9:27 pm, koranthala wrote:
>> On Jan 27, 6:57 pm, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
> [snip]
>> Thank you Jean-Paul.
On Jan 28, 7:10 pm, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 02:02:57 -0800 (PST), koranthala
> wrote:
> >On Jan 27, 9:27 pm, koranthala wrote:
> >> On Jan 27, 6:57 pm, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
> > [snip]
>
> >> Thank you Jean-Paul.
> >> My code is more complex than what I have menti
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 02:02:57 -0800 (PST), koranthala
wrote:
On Jan 27, 9:27 pm, koranthala wrote:
On Jan 27, 6:57 pm, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
[snip]
Thank you Jean-Paul.
My code is more complex than what I have mentioned. When I mentioned
msg.send, the msg object actually gets the data
On Jan 27, 9:27 pm, koranthala wrote:
> On Jan 27, 6:57 pm, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 05:46:25 -0800 (PST), koranthala
> > wrote:
> > >Twisted, being twisted in its behavior is causing quite a lot of
> > >confusion in design decisions.
>
> > I'm not sure I agree w
On Jan 27, 6:57 pm, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 05:46:25 -0800 (PST), koranthala
> wrote:
> >Twisted, being twisted in its behavior is causing quite a lot of
> >confusion in design decisions.
>
> I'm not sure I agree with your premise. ;)
>
>
>
> >I will put forward a compar
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 05:46:25 -0800 (PST), koranthala
wrote:
Twisted, being twisted in its behavior is causing quite a lot of
confusion in design decisions.
I'm not sure I agree with your premise. ;)
I will put forward a comparison of reactor and non-reactor patterns.
The code is not exact -
Twisted, being twisted in its behavior is causing quite a lot of
confusion in design decisions.
I will put forward a comparison of reactor and non-reactor patterns.
The code is not exact - whatever is shown is the gist of it.
For example, a message handler - in a usual scenario:
class messageHand
11 matches
Mail list logo
