ExoJob and ExoSimpleJob
jannis at xfce.org
Wed May 6 20:21:34 CEST 2009
On Wed, 06 May 2009 11:15:05 -0700
"Brian J. Tarricone" <bjt23 at cornell.edu> wrote:
> Jannis Pohlmann wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> > I've merged ExoJob and ExoSimpleJob into exo yesterday. They can be
> > used to wrap long-running, possibly-blocking operations in order to
> > execute them in an threaded/asynchronous and object-oriented way.
> > ExoJob is an abstract class.
> Possibly-stupid question, having not looked at it at all: any reason
> why it's not a GInterface instead? Seems like it could be much more
> flexible that way; you could turn pretty much *any* object into a job
> (heh, which might be a bad idea).
We could split it up into an ExoJob interface and an ExoAbstractJob
class, yeah. Right now ExoJob is not an interface because it also hides
all the threading/signalling complexity from subclasses. ExoAbstractJob
could do the same. Thoughts?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Xfce4-dev