Re: Review of gnio, round 1
- From: Stefan Kost <ensonic hora-obscura de>
- 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: Fri, 15 May 2009 20:59:07 +0300
Alexander Larsson schrieb:
> 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
> 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 just wanted to bring up SAT resolvers to just notice that they are called SAT
solvers :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boolean_satisfiability_problem
If noone else has any likely candidate then from my side the name is yours :)
] [Thread Prev