ExoJob and ExoSimpleJob

[Jannis Pohlmann]

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?

  - Jannis
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.xfce.org/pipermail/xfce4-dev/attachments/20090506/de696eac/attachment.pgp>