> Your modified Go server doesn't return "Pong" for "Ping".
The program doesn't read the result, so it doesn't matter. Returning Pong isn't harder, but why write all that code if it's going to be ignored anyway?
> It's fundamentally different. - you're firing off all your requests before waiting for any replies, and so hiding the latency in the more common RPC style request-response chain, which is a real problem.
As I said, the program isn't correlating the responses with the requests in the first place -- or even validating it got one. I don't know scala, but I've done enough benchmarking to watch even less sophisticated compilers do weird things with ignored values.
I made a small change that produced semantically the same program (same validation, etc...). It had similar performance to the scala one. If you don't think that's helpful, then add further constraints.
The program doesn't read the result, so it doesn't matter. Returning Pong isn't harder, but why write all that code if it's going to be ignored anyway?
> It's fundamentally different. - you're firing off all your requests before waiting for any replies, and so hiding the latency in the more common RPC style request-response chain, which is a real problem.
As I said, the program isn't correlating the responses with the requests in the first place -- or even validating it got one. I don't know scala, but I've done enough benchmarking to watch even less sophisticated compilers do weird things with ignored values.
I made a small change that produced semantically the same program (same validation, etc...). It had similar performance to the scala one. If you don't think that's helpful, then add further constraints.