# \[Pitch\] Distributed Actors

**URL:** <https://forums.swift.org/t/pitch-distributed-actors/51669>\
**Category:** Pitches\
**Tags:** distributed, actors\
**Created:** [September 1, 2021, 2:22am UTC](https://forums.swift.org/t/pitch-distributed-actors/51669 "2021-09-01T02:22:15Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 88

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ktoso](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/swift/user_avatar/forums.swift.org/ktoso/32/44526_2.png) [@ktoso](https://forums.swift.org/u/ktoso)\
**Post date:** [September 21, 2021, 12:25am UTC](https://forums.swift.org/t/pitch-distributed-actors/51669/88 "2021-09-21T00:25:01Z")

</div>

> [@benlings](#):
>
> Will there be a way to do a one-way message send to a distributed Actor?

I'm strongly advocating to fixing this in general, because it already is causing issues with plain local actors, somewhat undermining their usefulness as synchronization tool _in some situations_: [Task: Is order of task execution deterministic? - #2 by ktoso](https://forums.swift.org/t/task-is-order-of-task-execution-deterministic/51553/2)

One possible solution would be to allow `send actor.message()` which would be the "don't wait for reply; but DO wait until the message was enqueued (in the local sense, or 'sent' in the distributed sense)". This would also solve the issue of non-deterministic message order that is highlighted in the above forums thread.

It's not yet clear if the team would be willing to accept this language extension though; we don't have specific plans to share about this as of now.

If we had such uni directional calls, I'm not sure but we still may consider them throwing, just because the local part of a message send could still throw I suppose (i.e. serialization failure).

// edit 1: typo, plan -\> plain

---

_[View the full topic](https://forums.swift.org/t/pitch-distributed-actors/51669)._