On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 20:56 +0200, Xan wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Benjamin Otte <[email protected]> wrote:
> > This whole notion of async API is really ugly, I'd try very hard to
> > avoid it at all costs. In fact, it's so bad that people do sync IO
> > everywhere and pray nobody notices. (Try looking at the GTK icon theme
> > code or the CSS theme loading or basically anything else inside GTK.
> > Or try looking at lots of DBUS-using code that calls functions with
> > return values. In particular AT-SPI...)
> 
> Drive-by clarification:
> 
> keep in mind a lot of the API has to be asynchronous because of the
> process separation architecture in WebKit2. So even if a lot of the
> WebKit1 API might be easier to use depending on the specific case it
> might not be possible to replicate.

Drive-by preposterous clarification-for-a-third-party:

I think Company realizes that, but is arguing against gio-style async
APIs, not about loading being async at all. I like the idea of clearly
identifying that the API is asynchronous, but I'm not really sure using
gio-style async APIs for page loading will be a good thing.

Like Martin reminds us, we've screwed up (mainly because kalikiana and I
didn't see far enough) the page loading API making it too simplistic
once and had to go back, we want to make sure all of the complexities
and use cases are covered.

Cheers,

-- 
Gustavo Noronha Silva <[email protected]>
GNOME Project

_______________________________________________
webkit-gtk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-gtk

Reply via email to