patterns-discussion AT lists.siebelschool.illinois.edu
Subject: General talk about software patterns
List archive
- From: Al Boldi <a1426z AT gawab.com>
- To: Messaging Design Pattern <dsheppard2k AT yahoo.com>
- Cc: patterns-discussion AT cs.uiuc.edu
- Subject: Re: [patterns-discussion] MDP feasibility questions
- Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2011 16:38:59 +0300
- List-archive: <http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/patterns-discussion>
- List-id: General talk about software patterns <patterns-discussion.cs.uiuc.edu>
Messaging Design Pattern wrote:
> The particular point in discussion
> was whether or not messaging needs to be part of the software model:
As far as I can see, Messaging is already part of the software model.
It has been part of the software model for a very long time.
Windows is based on messaging.
All the new Linux desktops are now messaging based, i.e. dbus.
Mind you, when they switched to a messaging based model we got a noticeable
performance hit.
So, I am not sure what your objective is now?
If your objective is to convince people that messaging is part of reality and
that software should mimic this reality, then I think you are wasting your
time because people already know this.
OTOH, if your objective is to define a set of best practices to achieve a
successful implementation of a messaging sub-system, then I think that your
efforts are worthwhile and much appreciated.
Thanks!
--
Al
- Re: [patterns-discussion] MDP feasibility questions, Al Boldi, 01/01/2011
- Re: [patterns-discussion] MDP feasibility questions, Messaging Design Pattern, 01/07/2011
- Re: [patterns-discussion] MDP feasibility questions (type safety & compilation error), Messaging Design Pattern, 01/10/2011
- Re: [patterns-discussion] MDP feasibility questions, Messaging Design Pattern, 01/07/2011
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.