Restioson

Does this seem appropriate? ```rust /// Stop all actors on this address. This bypasses the message queue, so it will always be /// handled as soon as possible by all...

> Any thoughts on using an approach like [enum_dispatch](https://crates.io/crates/enum_dispatch) to eliminate the dynamic dispatch overhead? Thoughts? Yes, many :smile: plans, not currently. In the xtra-community matrix chat a while ago...

Here's the gist i mentioned: https://gist.github.com/Restioson/2b93c1b02ded2aa4422596b3fdd72ef6. It still has a lot of `#[async_trait]` so it's not box-free by any stretch of the imagination, but it does support static dispatch. It's...

How would we collect all the handlers together at compile time if using a macro? Another thing is I'd rather always have a 'macro-escape-hatch' so that users don't _have_ to...

> I believe the "static dispatch" you were seeking in your gist would come for free with this enum approach, as the compiler knows to optimize branching away when an...

Hi, sorry for getting to this so late. I am back from holiday now :) I think the main thing around having a unified mailbox would be that we would...

Hi, do you mean having multiple actors on one address, just to check?

Hmm, that Rust analyzer issue is really strange! I'm using IntelliJ Rust so this hasn't been an issue. The main issue with exposing this functionality would be finding a nice...

Firstly, this should rather be open in xtra, as that is the actor framework spaad is built upon. As regards xtra though, it uses channels, and I do not know...

This doesn't seem to be the case as of 0.3.17: see [here](https://docs.rs/futures-channel/0.3.17/src/futures_channel/lib.rs.html#38) ```rust #[cfg(not(futures_no_atomic_cas))] #[cfg(feature = "std")] pub mod mpsc; ```