I don’t know if this is a problem per-say, but very likely the API would often
be used in code looking more like this:
DispatchQueue.main.dispatchAsynch {
// stuff
}
And maybe this is just me, but the double occurrence of the word “dispatch” in
there rubs me the wrong way. :P
This is probably silly, but we’re dealing with a “queue” here, so in some ways,
could’t we “add” work to the queues or something?
DispatchQueue.main.add(.asynchronously) {
// async..
}
l8r
Sean
> On May 11, 2016, at 10:10 AM, Cole Campbell via swift-evolution
> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
>
>> My main piece of feedback is that the method names synchronously() and
>> asynchronously() don’t conform to Swift 3 naming conventions for functions
>> and methods:
>
> I agree.
>
>> dispatchAsynch()
>> dispatchSynch()
>
> I prefer something like this. It feels more Swifty. As it is, they aren't any
> longer than asynchronously(), if name length is a concern.
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution@swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
