Re: [AD] pushing events to queues

[Matthew Leverton <meffer@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Peter Wang <novalazy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'd insist on maintaining the constraint that events can only be in a
> queue if the event source is registered with the queue, mainly so we
> don't return events from a queue after the event source has been
> destroyed.  Is that okay for whatever use case you have in mind?
>
I don't have any specific use cases in mind ... it's more of a
theoretical question. It seems like the function is missing from the
point of completeness. It was brought up recently on a.cc although
honestly I didn't quite follow why it would be useful in that case:

http://www.allegro.cc/forums/thread/608514/

Ultimately, I think it's just a matter of convenience when you know
there is always a 1:1 relationship between emitters and listeners, or
you want to stuff a queue with a simulated event. I'm not sure that it
really provides any extra functionality, and if not then it's not
worth implementing if there are side effects or other seemingly
unhelpful limitations.

--
Matthew Leverton

> Peter
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a
> definitive record of customers, application performance, security
> threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
> sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-oct
> --
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alleg-developers
>