Transparent message passing is the way to go
Except when it isn't.
and I am quite amased why not everyone has transitioned to the paradigm already.
I can think of many reasons, such as perhaps having tried it and it turns out that "transparency" always comes at a cost. I gave a few other reasons in my original response, such as when you have a need for authentication over networks. As I also said in my original response, ZeroMQ has done this for a long time, and there are successful systems built on top of that.
the moderator gives obvious BS advice
Specifics would be much more useful.
Well if you really need to know that you are doing authentication from a certain place you are "screwed". Anyone can hack your binary and make you think you are wherever they want you to believe you are. There is no protection against that. As a programmer you are blind and deaf to the world in your little black box of assumptions i.e code.
To the BS I found this at the top
start_quote
1) read inputs
2) calculate simulation
3) render graphics
With networking, the "read inputs" step includes both keyboard and network, and you typically send the inputs to others right before going to the calculate simulation step.
end_quote
And I answered exactly that by saying no, that is very bad practice as you have different frequencies and workloads in these different steps. In most OSs though you are obliged to keep graphics rendering in the main thread which is a shame. At least as long as you use the legacy languages OpenGL or DirectX. GPUs bye-bye...
I had a look at ZeroMQ thanks to your comments and it seems quite interesting. It is intriguing although since I am almost done (on my third re-write) I just will go with the current architecture. It does deserve a closer inspection as the authors of ZeroMQ definitely have put a lot of good engineering into their product.
Lets just say that they have one major fallacy. You can handle reliability over UDP. Ponder on that.
spinningcube