3 ms·
"async" is a misnomer. What we call "async" is actually "chaotic async" or "time-optimized async" or "switchable async" and what we call "sync" is actually "ord
by nilslindemann 1y ago
"async" is a misnomer. What we call "async" is actually "chaotic async" or "time-optimized async" or "switchable async" and what we call "sync" is actually "ordered async" or "unoptimized async", and what we call "parallel" (a good name) is actually "sync".
Because nomen est omen, everything done now will just result in a growing pile of complexity. (see also the "class" misnomer for types), until someone looks again, and give the proper name - or operator - to the concept.
I imagine a future where we have a single operator on a line, like a "." which says: do everything from the last point to here parallel or async - however you want, in any order you want - but here is the point where everything has to be done ("joined"), before proceeding.
- 7bit 1y ago> "async" is a misnomer. What we call "async" is actually "chaotic async" or "time-optimized async" or "switchable async" and what we call "sync" is actually "ordered async" or "unoptimized async", and what we call "parallel" (a good name) is actually "sync". That's just semantic nitpicking. Everybody knows what async/sync means. The term is established for a very long time.
- nilslindemann 1y agoUsing a logical fallacy like "Everybody knows ..." indicates you are not sure about your argument, or intentionally dishonest.