On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 3:31 PM, james
On 11/06/2013 13:03, Brandon Kohn wrote:
On 6/10/2013 4:30 PM, james wrote:
I don't think that the limited correctness you get from that is very useful in a concurrent system.
Why not? I think the development crews that worked on the mars orbiter mission which failed would beg to differ.
[I]t all goes back to schema evolution, and that's why systems like protobuf tend to sacrifice clean syntax for extensibility..
I think that goes back to my original point. For a large subset of users, schema evolution is a non-issue—the entire system is deployed at once. A Boost.Actor library should have a good story for these users IMO. As an aside, the whole concept of 'schema evolution' has really piqued my curiosity. Is there some academic key-word I can search with to learn more about data structure evolution in systems that need to maintain some kind of backwards compatibility? --David Sankel