Re: [Vala] Implicit lamdas/closures

["Michael 'Mickey' Lauer" <mickey vanille-media de>]

Am Saturday 01 November 2008 09:27:24 schrieb Jürg Billeter:
> On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 16:22 +0200, Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote:
> > Am Wednesday 17 September 2008 00:34:08 schrieb Jürg Billeter:
> > > I like the idea of adding language support for asynchronous method
> > > calls, I was thinking of implementing this for some months but it
> > > wasn't on the top of my todo list.
> > >
> > > I haven't tried implementing this, but I think that the Vala code could
> > > be made even simpler and the labels should not be necessary. My idea is
> > > to introduce a modifier/attribute to mark methods as async capable. If
> > > you call an async method using the `yield' keyword, it will
> > > automatically introduce a continuation point there, i.e., add a
> > > callback and return in C. The async method call will not accept any
> > > delegate or lambda, it will just implicitly use the rest of the method
> > > body.
> >
> > That sounds amazing. Could we use this to have the missing support for
> > async. dbus server support or is that only useful for the client?
>
> Yes, async D-Bus server support will be built on top of this scheme. I'm
> planning to start working on this soon.

Great! This will give our projects a boost.

Cheers,
-- 
:M: