Implement IRepliable?
See original GitHub issueThe idea is to create a separate interface IRepliable { replyTo: ICanTell }
which would be implemented by messages that are expected to wait for response from actor processing the message. This way we could eventually drop support for Sender
property (this is quite error prone) and limit the range of <?
operator (to be used only when combined with repliable messages).
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 8 years ago
- Reactions:2
- Comments:6 (3 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Configuring Oracle iReceivables
Use the Messages window in the Oracle Application Object Library to edit ... All iReceivables messages use the prefix “ARI” or "OIR" in...
Read more >Idea: allow `tell` to yield execution context · Issue #77
Behaviors.receive { (ctx, request: IRepliable[Response]) => for ... we can use tell continuation to suspend current execution in order to ...
Read more >MVIE: Know you by Ladipoe ft. Simi IreFlexible
Simi IreFlexible. Leisure. This one has long been in my drafts. Working on it now, I can say I'm proud of me. I'm...
Read more >CA1063: Implement IDisposable correctly (code analysis)
The System.IDisposable interface is not implemented correctly. Possible reasons for this include: IDisposable is reimplemented in the class.
Read more >Adron homes: Application process and terminologies to ...
Some info are insider's information. But, here I am, your unpaid tattler, giving you za juice. We both know there's more to know,...
Read more >
Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free
Top Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Then this would get a big +1 from me, as I’ve always thought the current implementation was just wrong. Have you already done some partial work on this in a branch?
@Neftedollar @Lavinski the idea here is quite simple, but I guess it needs to be implemented on Akka level to actually bring not only compile time verification, but also performance benefit.
Essential code looks like this:
This way compiler could make sure, that all communicating sides will be able to handle each other’s messages.
However there are some problems with that:
Sender
field that we use to store requester anyway. So we don’t have any performance benefit here.IRepliable<>
interface which may be neutral for records, but it’s totally horrible if you have to implement it on the discriminated union.