On ven, 2014-08-22 at 15:13 +0200, Jacek Bukarewicz wrote: > > > >> My (and Aleksanders) main concerns about cynara_async_check returning > >> answer immediately are: > >> 1. client will be forced to handle two ways of returning answer, which > >> involves: > >> - in case of cynara_async_check() returning cached value through > >> return value, user even after passing response_callback, > >> will have to additionally handle cynara_async_check() return value > > that's also my opinion, using the return value is bad. > > > The thing is that caller often needs to know if access is allowed or > denied. That's the case for dbus daemon. If the result is not available > via return value then callback would have to be made responsible for > passing it via user data. > This also implies that existing structures couldn't be used directly but > would have to be wrapped by another structure containing response field. > It's not a big deal but still something we need to consider.
I fully agree with you. My point is that having 2 separate treatments of the answer is making much job for the programmer, the maintainer, the reviewer and is more difficult to test (coverage). Best regards josé > > Best regards, > _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
