Re: Review of gnio, round 1
- From: Xavier Claessens <xclaesse gmail com>
- To: Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com>
- Cc: Dan Winship <danw gnome org>, gtk-devel-list <gtk-devel-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: Review of gnio, round 1
- Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 19:50:07 +0200
Le lundi 11 mai 2009 à 19:26 +0200, Alexander Larsson a écrit :
> On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 10:49 -0400, Dan Winship wrote:
> > On 05/11/2009 10:30 AM, Stefan Kost wrote:
> > > Alexander Larsson schrieb:
> > >> GResolver is already in gio, yes. NameResolver isn't really less generic
> > >> than GResolver though. What else would it resolve but names? Could be
> > >> GDNSResolver though.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > That sounds good. I was just wondering as there are other resolvers too
> > > (SATResolver, EquationResolver, ...)
> > But are those likely to ever be in the "G" namespace?
> > Also, it's an interface to libresolv, so... GResolver.
> > But anyway, we could rename it to GDNSResolver if people wanted. Or just
> > "GDNS"?
> I personally don't think GResolver is that bad. Its unlikely that we
> will put any other resolver in glib/gio or otherwise in the G namespace,
> and conflicts with resolvers in other namespaces are not really a
> problem either in C or in bindings.
> I'm not violently opposed to GDnsResolver if people point out real
> causes for concern though.
I don't like GDnsResolver for the simple reason that with such name I
never know if the acronyme is in upper case or not... GDNSResolver VS
] [Thread Prev