Feedback on sample code

[francischeung]

Hi @luisgmsft,

Here is some feedback. Please let me know if you have any questions.

• Use EN-us spelling of "initialized":
  https://github.com/luisgmsft/priority-queue-sf-way/blob/master/QueuingService/QueuingService.cs#L24

• Enqueue method should be named EnqueueAsync:
  https://github.com/luisgmsft/priority-queue-sf-way/blob/master/QueuingService/QueuingService.cs#L30

• Seems strange to have the QueuingService enqueue its own dummy  data. Perhaps create a (integration) test that enqueues dummy data and then validates the values from calls to GetNext:
  https://github.com/luisgmsft/priority-queue-sf-way/blob/master/QueuingService/QueuingService.cs#L111

• Not clear how a consumer would access the QueuingService. The integration test would push on this. I'd assume that you could create a new consumer service that would call ServiceProxy.Create passing in "IQueuing". Would you expect this service to be only used by other SF services? If not, you should create a WebAPI front end.

• The LowWorker/MidWorker/TopWorker implementations don't show they do any work. It would make more sense that these classes would define a method override or delegate property for work to be done that would be called by Worker.

[francischeung]

Also, an important concept that seems to be missing is that the Worker implementations seem to be treated the same. I'd expect that Top priority messages would be processed before Mid and Low. I'd also expect that Mid priority messages would be processed before Low. I'm not seeing how this is implemented in your sample.