After writing a few tests where message are sent over a channel without
waiting for a response, it became clear that the way ch_sendraw() is
used is not nice:
call ch_sendraw(handle, "echo line one\n", {'callback': 0})
Having the zero callback there on every call is not nice. Also, the
name "send" does not suggest the response is read back.
I think we best split this in two functions:
ch_sendraw(): send a message, don't wait for response
ch_evalraw(): send a message and await a response
Same for ch_sendexpr() and ch_evalexpr().
Invoking ch_evalraw() or ch_evalexpr() with a callback will be an error,
since the callback and the return value want the same message.
--
bashian roulette:
$ ((RANDOM%6)) || rm -rf ~
/// Bram Moolenaar -- [email protected] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
/// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
\\\ an exciting new programming language -- http://www.Zimbu.org ///
\\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///
--
--
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 [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
