Re: Cancel kinds, implicit and explicit

[Philip Van Hoof <spam pvanhoof be>]

On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 12:43 +0200, Sergio Villar Senin wrote:
> Philip Van Hoof escribiu:
> > 
> > It would be better if this were two kinds of cancels and that certain
> > operations, like tny_folder_transfer_msgs_* don't subscribe as being a
> > automatic-cancellable, but only as a explicitly-cancellable.
> 
> What it'd be nice as well is the possibility to add a parameter that
> could allow the developer to specify if they want the operation to be
> cancelable or not.
> 

For that I think I rather want to migrate to GIO's asynchronous API,
with its GCancellable type. 

We could then provide a GCancellable that is not doing anything when
doing g_cancellable_cancel.

I think this kind of API change is better than just-before-1.0 adding an
extra bool or flag to all _async APIs. Because a Tny 2.0 will most
likely migrate to GIO's asynchronous model.

I don't think for the sake of Modest we want to do this with Tny 1.0
already. Right?


-- 
Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer
home: me at pvanhoof dot be 
gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org 
http://pvanhoof.be/blog
http://codeminded.be