Re: [9fans] critique of sockets API

["Devon H. O'Dell" <devon.odell@gmail.com>]

2009/6/11 Eris Discordia <eris.discordia@gmail.com>:
>> but given that plan 9 is about having a system that's easy
>> to understand and modify, i would think that it would be
>> tough to demonstrate that asyncronous i/o or callbacks
>> could make the system (or even applications) simplier.
>> i doubt that they would make the system more efficient,
>> either.
>>
>> do you have examples that demonstrate either?
>
> I can't claim I have anything in code which would be necessary for an actual
> demonstration or for going beyond the "talk talk talk" stage. I can,
> however, present one simple case: in some applications asynchronous name
> resolving is a must and it can be realized by either of threads or
> callbacks. Crawlers and scanners come to mind. Spawning threads for DNS
> requests could be more costly than registering a set of callbacks within one
> thread and then harvesting the results within that same thread.

s/could be/is/

>From real world product experience across multiple operating systems
and architectures.