Feel free to create one for .read, I already have a radar that covers .after
> On Jul 7, 2016, at 7:16 PM, Darren Mo <[email protected]> wrote: > > Should I create a bug report for changing `DispatchQueue.after` and > `DispatchSource.read`? > > Darren > >> On Jun 21, 2016, at 7:35 PM, Darren Mo <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Jun 21, 2016, at 5:28 PM, Matt Wright <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Jun 20, 2016, at 5:50 PM, Darren Mo via swift-evolution >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> DispatchQueue.after(when:execute:) >>>> ---------------------------------- >>>> This one simply doesn’t read grammatically. For example, >>>> `queue.after(when: .now) { … }` becomes “queue, after when now …”. Since >>>> dispatch_after is semantically just an extended version of dispatch_async >>>> (I think), we can name this .executeAsync(after:_:). >>> >>> I replied to messages out of order but I agree, moving `.after` onto .async >>> seems like the more natural place for it to live. >> >> Yay! >> >>>> DispatchSource subclass names >>>> ----------------------------- >>>> Why is it DispatchSourceMemoryPressure instead of >>>> MemoryPressureDispatchSource? I don’t think I’ve ever seen subclass names >>>> where the superclass part is at the beginning of the name. >>> >>> I’m not so keen to remove the Dispatch prefix from the front of the source >>> types, given that we avoided doing that for the remainder of the module. >> >> What is the rationale for keeping the Dispatch prefix anyways? (I couldn’t >> find it in the archives.) >> >>>> DispatchSource factory methods >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> e.g. DispatchSource.read(fileDescriptor:queue:). The API Design Guidelines >>>> mandate that factory methods begin with the prefix “make”. Indeed, >>>> DispatchSource.read might mislead people to think that a read will be >>>> performed by this method. A better name would be >>>> .makeReadSource(fileDescriptor:queue:). >>> >>> Agreed, these should probably be brought into line with that guideline. >> >> Yay! >> >>>> And why are these factory methods on DispatchSource instead of >>>> initializers on the subclasses? >>>> ReadDispatchSource.init(fileDescriptor:queue:) would be way clearer. >>> >>> The source types are not subclasses, due to implementation details they are >>> protocols. >> >> Oops, missed that. Sorry. > _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
