On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 18:52 -0500, James Westby wrote: > On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 09:52:50 +0000, Stuart Langridge > <[email protected]> wrote: > > It is difficult to think of a good way of handling this without either > > apps polling whats_changed in a background thread or implementations > > providing some sort of async the-database-has-changed signal. However, > > async stuff is very implementation-specific, which makes it hard to > > document this approach, and the Python reference implementation won't > > contain it (because it is all sync and does not require a mainloop). > > It seems like something that could be an "optional extra" though. Those > places where it makes sense can implement it, and there can be > guidelines on doing that. Places that can't have the basic sync API. > > Anyone who is doing GUI work is likely to end up layering threads and > signals/deferreds/callbacks/whatever on top of a sync API anyway.
Agreed. However, it's difficult to talk about best-practices for using U1DB if those best-practices are implementation-specific. sil -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~u1db-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~u1db-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
