As a side note, I see sorokin's posts about DCOM, RPC and multi-threading:
> Probably some unique thread-id can be propagated through the calls. And if incoming call has the same thread-id as one of our outgoing call it is handled inside this outgoing call as in nested message loop, otherwise a new thread from thread pool is used. This will create an illusion that two processes share the same set of threads and it works well with mutexes.
I think he is slowly driving towards an actor like message passing thing like Erlang, Akka or Orleans without even realizing.
Any sufficiently complicated concurrent program in another language contains an ad hoc informally-specified bug-ridden slow implementation of half of Erlang.
As a side note, I see sorokin's posts about DCOM, RPC and multi-threading:
> Probably some unique thread-id can be propagated through the calls. And if incoming call has the same thread-id as one of our outgoing call it is handled inside this outgoing call as in nested message loop, otherwise a new thread from thread pool is used. This will create an illusion that two processes share the same set of threads and it works well with mutexes.
I think he is slowly driving towards an actor like message passing thing like Erlang, Akka or Orleans without even realizing.
Which reminds me of Virding's law:
http://rvirding.blogspot.com/2008/01/virdings-first-rule-of-...
---
Any sufficiently complicated concurrent program in another language contains an ad hoc informally-specified bug-ridden slow implementation of half of Erlang.
---