You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In many cases, it's less than ideal to use ØMQ's synchronous sockets, but the communication being done is still in one-reply-to-one-request form. ECell's logic for handling these cases is spread out a bit through the code (mostly in Calling, Management, and line_handlers.rb), and is the source of some failures to be DRY.
I think it'd be a good idea to write a new class (or maybe just add methods to Line) that abstract over this use case. Interface-wise, it'd provide a method which you call with the message to send that then synchronously returns the response, so that rep = line << req; rep = rep.wait can be replaced with rep = something.the_method(req).
If done correctly, I think this rid of the need for the hardcoding in Constants::RETURNS.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In many cases, it's less than ideal to use ØMQ's synchronous sockets, but the communication being done is still in one-reply-to-one-request form. ECell's logic for handling these cases is spread out a bit through the code (mostly in
Calling
,Management
, andline_handlers.rb
), and is the source of some failures to be DRY.I think it'd be a good idea to write a new class (or maybe just add methods to Line) that abstract over this use case. Interface-wise, it'd provide a method which you call with the message to send that then synchronously returns the response, so that
rep = line << req; rep = rep.wait
can be replaced withrep = something.the_method(req)
.If done correctly, I think this rid of the need for the hardcoding in
Constants::RETURNS
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: