2016-09-22 8:55 GMT+02:00 Jean-Philippe André <j...@videolan.org>:

> Hi,
>
> On 22 September 2016 at 15:34, Davide Andreoli <d...@gurumeditation.it>
> wrote:
>
> > 2016-09-22 0:45 GMT+02:00 Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri <barbi...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Tom Hacohen <t...@osg.samsung.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > On 21/09/16 15:10, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote:
> > > >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 5:26 AM, Tom Hacohen <t...@osg.samsung.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >> [...]
> > > >>>> promise/future should be first-class citizen... as well as
> iterator
> > > >>>> and the likes. There is a start already, but refinement is really
> > > >>>> needed, like returning an iterator<x> should handle warn_unused,
> > free,
> > > >>>> own... Promise should have its own callback signature, simplified
> > for
> > > >>>> the user.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> They can, be, but they will just be provided by Eo. There's no need
> > for
> > > >>> any special treatment in Eo.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Promise signature: you don't need to do it in Eo. I mean, you can
> > add a
> > > >>> special type in Eolian, but Eo itself need not be aware. Also, I
> > > disagree.
> > > >>
> > > >> Do you mean still use Eo's events to dispatch promises?
> > > >
> > > > Not necessarily, just use the same signature because it's a good one,
> > > > it's extendable, it applies here too, and it's easier for bindings
> this
> > > way.
> > >
> > > It's a good one to who? It's a generic one, for sure, but that doesn't
> > > make it a good one. Promises, for instance, will carry a value, but
> > > it's not immediately available. Even for regular events I don't get
> > > why the object must be fetched from the efl_event...
> > >
> >
> > I'm with Gustavo here, reusing the same callback signature for event
> > and promises don't seems to be a good idea, it just make the usage more
> > confusing and more error prone. Having 2 different signature will make
> > the separation line between events and promises more clear.
> >
>
> I can hear Cedric screaming in despair on the other side of the planet.
>
> We argued that a single signature was better, as our different callback
> signatures (ecore events, evas events. smart callbacks, ...) were one of
> the pain points of using EFL. Now it's pretty clear some people want to
> reintroduce this with promises vs. events. Gustavo missed these heated
> arguments as he started working back on EFL after those long mail threads.
> Same for why object is in Efl_Event rather than being in the argument list.
>

For what I remember we discussed that all EVENTS must use the same
signature, and I'm ok with that. But promises are different, they are not
events.

But I agree with you that we are arguing too much without a clear view of
what
we have now and what we are going to implement wrt promises and future.
At this point I'm also confused between future and promise... I highly
suggest
to write a wiki page with all the needed explanations and examples usage for
both promise and future , so that we can discuss with a documented base.




>
> To be fair, promises were supposed to carry a single value only, IOW
> Efl_Event.info was supposed to be the value. No double cast. Thinking of
> it, I'm not sure why "next" isn't in fact a property on the promise itself
> (as it's Efl_Event.object), rather than being awkwardly passed in the event
> info -- there may be a good reason. (see also efl_event_callback_stop).
>
> Anyway. I'll wait until I can see *exactly* how async operations (image
> file_set in particular) work with promises. Too much arguing about unclear
> details until that is done.
>
> --
> Jean-Philippe André
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> _______________________________________________
> enlightenment-devel mailing list
> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel

Reply via email to