On Thu, 2012-03-15 at 10:34 +0100, Krzesimir Nowak wrote:
> 2012/3/14 Patrick Ohly <[email protected]>:
> > Hello Chris!
> >
> > You added a callback parameter to addResource() (formerly known as
> > enqueue()) and related functions. There's no documentation for that in
> > server.h/cpp. What is it meant to be used for, what kind of constraints
> > does it have, etc.? In other words, please document it for me... ;-)
> >
>
> That is my doing again. Will document it. The callback was added,
> because addResource calls checkQueue() which calls SetActive, which is
> asynchronous. The callback is called when after all SetActive calls
> are finished or, if there was no call to SetActive, at the end of
> checkQueue(). In short - addResource, removeResource are asynchronous
> too, so given callback is called when they are finished.
Instead of just calling the parameter "callback" it would be good to use
a name which is related to the time when the callback is invoked.
The goal of the callback is to return the final result of a D-Bus method
invocation to the D-Bus client, right?
Why does that have to wait for the completion of SetActive? Can't we
tell the D-Bus client that its StartSession() was successful, then later
emit the right "status changed" signal?
The code is here:
// If not we activate the resource and place it in the active
resource list.
if (canRun) {
m_activeResources.push_back(waitingResource);
// If this is a session, we set active and emit sessionChanged
to clients.
boost::shared_ptr<SessionResource> session =
boost::dynamic_pointer_cast<SessionResource>(wq_iter->lock());
if (session) {
++(*counter);
session->setActiveAsync(true,
boost::bind(&Server::setActiveCb, this, session, counter, callback));
}
m_waitingResources.erase(wq_iter++);
}
That seems unnecessarily complex to me, but perhaps I am missing something.
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.
_______________________________________________
SyncEvolution mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution
