On Sat, 25 May 2013 08:52:30 +0200 Aristotle Pagaltzis <pagalt...@gmx.de> wrote:
> That’s just what futures are for, I think? As in, they abstract the > sync/async control flow out of the code. And you’re just putting that > on top of one common HTTP client API pattern. It seems like discovery > rather than invention to me. Oh sure - I didn't mean to suggest I'd invented the entire concept of using futures as control flow :) Simply, this particular arrangement of methods/API details, for solving this particular HTTP problem. > Naming-wise I’d emphasise futures rather than IO::Async, natch. Oh indeedy. Does anything come to mind, though? -- Paul "LeoNerd" Evans leon...@leonerd.org.uk ICQ# 4135350 | Registered Linux# 179460 http://www.leonerd.org.uk/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
