> > > > Is there a way to make sure it is call in the order it has > > > been put Async? > > > > > > Well, we could change the calling logic... but is there a > will for > > > such a thing? > > > > Isn't it against the rule of "least surprise" (not to mention > > consistency) as it is? > > Which 'least surprise'? (And what is that rule?) Which > consistency? (Consistency would be to call the queue in the > order they have been queued; not the contrary as it is right now.)
>From your description, I understood it currently behaves as a stack (LIFO - Last In First Out), not a FIFO (First In First Out) queue. That's why I spoke of least surprise (it's a usability rule, but applies to API design too and pretty much to anything that humans use, not just UIs). Same goes for consistency, if it's a queue, then FIFO is expected. The guy asked "Is there a way to make sure it is call in the order it has been put Async"? So I expect they want the first one queued to be the first one called, etc. If it's doing that already then where do they see a problem? ---------------- George Birbilis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Computer & Informatics Engineer Microsoft MVP J# for 2004-2006 Borland "Spirit of Delphi" ++ QuickTime, Delphi, ActiveX, .NET components ++ http://www.kagi.com/birbilis ++ Robotics ++ http://www.mech.upatras.gr/~Robotics http://www.mech.upatras.gr/~robgroup _____ avast! Antivirus <http://www.avast.com> : Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 0647-0, 09/11/2006 Tested on: 14/11/2006 9:43:49 ?? avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2006 ALWIL Software. _________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
