Open tinu73 opened 2 years ago
Hi!
I am not sure I fully understood your issue with the synchronous interface. If you actually need async semantics, you can always wrap it into future/promises, right? Just introducing them on the connector level does not really make sense in my opinions, since the calling semantics through the RPC client will be synchronous again.
Could you explain in a bit more detail, maybe even using the TCP connector example what exactly would be easier/better with async interfaces?
First of all this is really a great and useful framework.
I would like to raise the question or rather a discussion weather the interfaces are transport agnostic yes or no. If i am right in my conclusion they are not. Why?
client.hpp
andiclientconnector.hpp
are implemented in a synchronous request/response pattern, therefore offering a Send method with return typestd::string
client.hpp
andiclientconnector.hpp
cannot be used 'agnostically' out of the boxiclientconnector.hpp
andclient.hpp
have to be extended by offering, e.g. a Post method without a return value and a MessageHandler, e.g.iclientconnector.hpp
client.hpp
client.cpp