Just as with current API for sockets, for example, using the waitFor* family of functions.
-- Georg Rudoy http://leechcraft.org 27.09.2011 14:05 пользователь "Matthias Hörmann" <[email protected]> написал: >> I'd still like to emphasize that it's much easier to make sync API of >> async one rather then do the reverse. IMHO that single argument should >> be enough to decide in favour of async API. > > And how would you do such a thing easily? Assuming we are talking about > Qt signal/slot asynchronous APIs those are a real pain to turn into a > synchronous > API without ending up in a horrible mess of nested QEventLoops that sometimes > abort for no obvious reason (they do when the inner event loop has no reason to > quit but one further out does). > > There are ways of implementating asynchronous APIs that do not have this problem > of course but Qt's usual way of implementing them is not among those as far as I > can tell as a regular Qt user. > > > -- > Mit freundlichen Grüßen, > > Matthias Hörmann > > fon: +49 (0) 521 - 329647-29 > fax: +49 (0) 521 - 329647-40 > email: [email protected] > > > --------------- > saltation GmbH & Co. KG | Niederwall 43 | 33602 Bielefeld > Sitz Bielefeld | Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRA 15344 > Persönlich haftende Gesellschafterin: > saltation Beteiligungs-GmbH | Niederwall 43 | 33602 Bielefeld > Sitz Bielefeld | Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 39339 > Geschäftsführer: Daniel Brün > ---------------
_______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
