Re: gvfs status report
- From: "Dimi Paun" <dimi lattica com>
- To: "Alexander Larsson" <alexl redhat com>
- Cc: "gnome-vfs-list gnome org" <gnome-vfs-list gnome org>, "gtk-devel-list gnome org" <gtk-devel-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: gvfs status report
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 09:13:18 -0500 (EST)
On Fri, February 16, 2007 02:45, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> I guess this makes some sense. The disadvantages is that its not as
> obvious which implementations of an interface there are (its not as easy
> as GInputStream*), but its clearly much easier to read.
>
> I'm fine with changing this. What do other people think?
I'd like to second this -- it's the smart thing to do IMO.
Other well known APIs (Java, .NET, Win32) use a similar naming
pattern, and despite it's functional shortcomings, seems to
be what people prefer.
And it's usually best to go with the flow for such subjective matters.
--
Dimi Paun <dimi lattica com>
Lattica, Inc.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]