The async issue seems like a bike shed. Whatever you want to call it, this feature is very powerful and I'm very grateful many are taking it serious. Let's focus on encouraging the devs and reviewers to getting a patch the community can accept. If the name really is an issue, I'm sure another name can work as well. Perhaps 'setinterval' or something like that.
On Tuesday, September 10, 2013 11:59:34 PM UTC-7, Thomas wrote: > On 11 September 2013 00:18, Nikolay Pavlov <zyx...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Why do you keep calling it async? > Referring to the introduction to asynchronous programming linked below, the > patch is an almost asynchronous feature, or at least a completition of the > already existing asynchronous features of vim. With all the "autocmd-events" > we already have the posibillity to run code asynchronous. > > > Anyway asynchronous doesn't mean threaded, as far as I know and referring > again to the link. That a two different concepts (which you can combine if > you want). > > http://cs.brown.edu/courses/cs168/f12/handouts/async.pdf -- -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
