RE: The new GTask name in GIO is wrong

[Tal Hadad <tal_hd hotmail com>]

Thanks for your replies.
About the GTask, as I said before, it's not a real problem.

I just wished there would be an non-conflict easier to understand type.

If you said you could mix all future improvements in GTask, well, I'm in doubt.

Also, as you said, GTask is used only internally, what would happen when you try
to give the callee side some clue about the aync process? I guess you'll use a
different type.
You might said you'll return a GTask from async method, but as said in bugzilla,
it will break gtkmm ABI, and won't let the callee side to manually start it.

I still think the GTask is way more general, but thanks for your replies!

Hope the best for GLib
Tal

Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 21:44:24 -0700
From: mbrush codebrainz ca
To: gtk-devel-list gnome org
Subject: Re: The new GTask name in GIO is wrong

On 12-11-02 06:11 PM, Matthew Brush wrote:
> On 12-11-02 07:46 AM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
>> hi;
>>
>> On 2 November 2012 14:15, Tal Hadad <tal_hd hotmail com> wrote:
>>> First, there were an old project called GTask[0], which tried to give
>>> parallelism ability and
>>> alternative to today GIO async(I think it wasn't exist back than).
>>
>> this is inconsequential: GTask was abusing the G* namespace, which is
>> reserved for GLib, GObject, and GIO. also, GTask has been
>> re-implemented/renamed to Iris[0].
>>
> Maybe the docs[3] could be updated
 
Patch attached. Apologies if I edited a generated file.
 
Cheers,
Matthew Brush
 

_______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list gnome org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list