On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Tom Hacohen <t...@osg.samsung.com> wrote: > Hey, > > This email assumes some knowledge of Eo in order to keep it short.
> Therefore, I suggest we just allow unreffing the last ref (the parent > one) with eo_unref() which will implicitly unparent the object as the > correct legal way of deleting an object. Essentially this mean we define > that the parent reference is shared with the programmer. To keep it short. I think I'm OK with it. There could be errors where the programmer doesn't own it because the parent thinks it owns it alone and might want to unref it in another thread. However, it seems so unlikely that the convenience of sharing this last reference is much better IMO and makes the API much more simpler to be used by other libraries, such as bindings. We might just have to think about destruction and multi-threading and see what will be our threading guarantees. [snip] > Thanks, > Tom. -- Felipe Magno de Almeida ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched! https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
