Re: Asynchronous DNS

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <address@hidden>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>,  <address@hidden>
> Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 18:52:55 +1100
> 
> > Well, back to square /two/ I would say, depending on how you arrange the
> > squares ;) Because application code would just loose the
> > async-DNS-resolve benefits.  As most of the functions such as
> > `set-process-coding-system', that would need to block, require only an
> > initialized socked (and not really a connected one).  And if the author
> > of the code doesn't care, he just accepted that he wrote semi-optimized
> > async code -- but code that actually works.  This doesn't sound wrong to
> > me. 
> 
> Yeah, that's true.  It's less fragile.  But I wonder whether being that
> application friendly can sometimes be a disservice?  If you're an
> application writer, trying to be as async as possible (that is, after
> all, why you're using :nowait 'immediate), would you prefer that random
> functions block without telling you, or that they error out?

I don't think we should punish users of those packages and their
developers by breaking their code.  If they didn't get their act
together, their code will not enjoy the advantages of asynchronicity,
but it should still work, IMO.  Teaching by punishment rarely works,
IME, certainly not in a community such as this one.