🚀 go-pugleaf

John Dilley <jad@nsa.hp.com> writes:

	The point is to preserve the more convenient synchronous
	model.

But is it really more convienient?  I think it's rather contrived.  I
believe that we live in an asynchronous world.  As such, asynchronous
programming is "natural" to me.  The whole notion of giving up control
to a proceedure call that may take an indeterminate amount of time
seems backwards to me.

I even get nervous calling gethostbyname() ... :-)

	I argue that the asynchronous model splits the synchronous
	model up: you make a call, [block awaiting responses, select
	the response to your call,] and finally resume.

Except it's more like: instantiate the call, return to the dispatcher.
When the response arrives, invoke the callback with the local state.
This is orthogonal to syncronous processing.  There's no such thing as
"blocking" except (in UNIX) where you call select() in your main loop.
Then you're not really "blocked" per se, but rather sleeping.

/jordan