On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 08:42:09 GMT, Sönke Ludwig wrote:

On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 04:06:56 GMT, zhaopuming wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 17:39:54 GMT, Sönke Ludwig wrote:

One way to achieve this would be to use a timer and and a signal. The requests are all run in parallel in different tasks/fibers using runTask and the original task will wait until either the timeout is reached or all requests have been answered. The only drawback is that all the late requests will continue to run after the timeout - it shouldn't have any serious impact on anything though, their connections will time out eventually or the request is finished a bit later.

A little background, we are currently using vert.x for our project, but after first online traffic tests,
we found that their client code does not satisfy our requirements.

We are considering writing a new HttpClient.

I personally find that vibe.d is more elegant (and theoretically more efficient) than vert.x/netty, so I'd like
to evaluate more and hopefully switch to vibe.d when it becomes more stable and we get more understanding to it.

I'll have to persuade my colleagues for switching to D though, which is not an easy task (because we are in Java world).

Best Regards

Puming

Sounds like, language wise, it should be such a relief for everyone to suddenly have all those possibilities in D :D (I never could get over the fact that there is no operator overloading in Java). But I know that a lot of convicing is necessary for most people to have them switch languages, especially since they may not even recognize the benefits as they have to learn a lot of new concepts first. So naturally most people will first concentrate on every drawback they can find to defend the current language/process/situation. But regarding D it's also still important to carefully evaluate the tooling/platform issues depending on the type of application (iOS/Android, Win64/Win8, GC etc.).

Yes, there are a lot of issues to be sorted out before I can actually sneak D and vibe.d into our company.

I'll have to learn much details about it in order to convince my colleagues, it'll take time.

Meanwhile I'll keep close look on your work and learn :-)

I definitely agree in terms of stability of vibe.d - altough in general it's a very stable experience now, there are at least two issues that only crop up in very high load scenarios that definitely have to be fixed before it can really be considered production quality (plus a thorough test and benchmark of the whole system has to be done at some point). Well, I'm going to use it for more serious things soon, but someone has to go first, and in case of an emergency I can commit a hot fix in a matter of minutes/hours, which will not necessarily be the case for someone else. Anyway, I try to gradually increase the risk as time goes by. The vibe.d site and everything around it ran pretty flawlessly for the last few months with increasing traffic, so I think it's ready to be taken to the next step now.

Keep up the good work :-) You've got a good start.

Regards,
Sönke