Marc Lehmann, el 16 de enero a las 05:43 me escribiste: > > > Maybe loop_simpel should rarlly be "loop" if we can get away with it > > > without collisions. > > > > Yes, I thought about it too, but with all that "loop" everywhere I didn't > > thought it was a great idea (exactly because the high probability of > > colission ;). But once the patch is stabilized I can try to rename it to > > loop and see what happens... > > Well, I think its a wonderful idea, its a loop, it should be called loop :)
If we call it loop, then the loop() method has to be called other way, that's why I didn't call it loop. Maybe loop -> start, unloop -> stop (like watchers? but since they are radically different methods, maybe the must be called otherwise). Maybe just loop -> do_loop? -- Leandro Lucarella (luca) | Blog colectivo: http://www.mazziblog.com.ar/blog/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Es mejor probar el sabor de sapo y darse cuenta que es feo, antes que no hacerlo y creer que es una gran gomita de pera. -- Dr Ricardo Vaporesso, Malta 1951 _______________________________________________ libev mailing list libev@lists.schmorp.de http://lists.schmorp.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libev
