Re: [PATCH 0/2] Synchronous versions for asynchronous functions

["Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)" <zeenix gmail com>]

Hi,

On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Juan A. Suarez Romero
<jasuarez igalia com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-13 at 08:22 +0200, Iago Toral wrote:
> So anyone is strongly against it, I'll add this synchronous functions.
>
> But before continuing, are you OK with using grl_media_source_browse()
> for synchronous function and grl_media_source_browse_async() for
> asynchronous version?
>
> For what I seen so far, seems the standard way is suffixing asynchronous
> functions with _async() word.

   I strongly recommend not prefixing async variants but rather the
sync variants. IMHO gio got that wrong. As async api should be the
(strongly) recommended one, doing it the gio way may very well give
people the opposite impression (i-e that async variants are just there
for the sake of completion). In fact some some good hackers I talked
to got this wrong.

   Anyway, just my 2 cents.

-- 
Regards,

Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)
FSF member#5124