On 1 June 2010 19:10, Steffen Mueller <smuel...@cpan.org> wrote: > But I was going to add another, minor note to the discussion. I don't > think the v1 Task system is all that bad to work with (don't know about > Services). I believe it held out well enough for prototype code that > started as a learning experiment. It already hides most of the *hard* > issues with concurrency.
I concur. The 1st gen Task API holds true to the best ideals of Padre, of boldly forging into areas nobody has any idea about, and landing something that works for others to build on. I think it's a testament to your original implementation that it took me three months and a complete working example of a Task API to poke at, to write the 200 lines of code at the core of mine and which is still less sophisticated. Also, for the most part I agree that this should land with less impact than Config 2.0. Adam K _______________________________________________ Padre-dev mailing list Padre-dev@perlide.org http://mail.perlide.org/mailman/listinfo/padre-dev
