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

["Juan A. Suarez Romero" <jasuarez igalia com>]

On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 10:39 +0200, Iago Toral wrote:
> For the record, I think the same but I thought I was the only one
> thinking that 
> ;)


While this suggestion makes sense for me, I always would expect that if
both synchronous and asynchronous functions are provided, the
recommended ones are always the asynchronous ones, no matter how you
name them, as they are more efficient.


In any case, I will follow your suggestion, and just prefixing sync
fuctions with _sync().

	J.A