[REBOL] Re: Rugby doco - wip
From: rotenca:telvia:it at: 28-Jan-2002 15:05
> Thus a big difference for understanding the two is that:
> * View makes an event "concrete" using objects and it dispatches
> these events to developer defined functions.
> *Rugby "eats" the event and instead focusses on providing a
> pidgeon hole (ticket) for the function results.
> This means that currently a Rugby developer has to, in effect, re-create the
> consumed event through polling. I wonder then, if Rugby provided a
> dispatch system, whether it would be more understandable. Please note,
> I'm quite unaware of the impact on the Rugby design this idea implies.
Is this what you want?
- client send a request to the server port and ask for an anwer on a given
- client go to wait on his port
- server awakes for the client request and makes what the request asked
- server send an answer to the client port
- server wait
- client awakes because receveis the answer
So the "ticket" should be only a client port to wait for.
This is the mode in which async code was executed by ARexx on old Amiga.