Re: Simultaneous destructors

Chris Jones wrote:
> Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
>> I slightly prefer the divergent-path approach rather than the discard
>> approach, for one main reason: it means that we don't have to implement
>> special handling for actors which have already been "destructed" but are
>> still receiving messages.
>>
> 
> You mean for stateless protocols?  We don't need this special handling 
> for necko channels, the destruction sequence isn't racy with both 
> explicit ACK and |discard|.
> 

... or divergent state, I forgot to add.  All three of these proposals 
were made explicitly to avoid racy deletion.

Cheers,
Chris