Re: [OT] Sync vs ASync Server Comms
Re: [OT] Sync vs ASync Server Comms
- Subject: Re: [OT] Sync vs ASync Server Comms
- From: Steve Sisak <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 17:45:14 -0500
At 3:18 PM +0000 2/25/13, Dave wrote:
On 25 Feb 2013, at 13:57, Steve Sisak wrote:
Created A, B, C, make C dependent on A, B, submit all of them to an
NSOperationQueue and wait for C to complete (or put your completion
code on a block dependent on C -- NSBlockOperation makes this
really easy.
This was just a simplistic example, unfortunately in real life it's
not possible to use an Operation Queue effectively for what needs to
be done, and, anyway, the code is much harder to read and maintain
to use one.
Why? I use them for some very high performance stuff.
Also, you don't have to do everything on the main thread -- I
frequently use a (single) background server thread which sits in a
runloop and do everything but the UI from there.
This keeps both you UI and engine responsive.
Yes, that's basically the same conclusion I came to, but if do this,
it negates a lot of the initial simplicity of using that approach,
so, at that point it's a toss up on which method is preferable.
The current trend is away from threads and toward asynchronous programming.
That's orthogonal to whether your tasks are run on a single
(XXRunLoop) or multiple (GCD) threads -- the advantage of GCD is that
the system gets do decide how many worker threads to fire up based on
the number of cores available, system load, and who's blocked.
NSOperationQueue adds dependencies -- you can do similar things with
blocks and dispatch_groups.
If you don't like NSOperationQueue, go bare metal and use GCD directly.
I suggested NSOperationQueue because it's exactly the right tool for
your example.
WAYRTTD?
-Steve
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden