<html><head></head><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div>The names as they exist match what's in TDPL, so they're somewhat set in stone. <br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On Jan 22, 2012, at 3:05 PM, Manu <<a href="mailto:turkeyman@gmail.com">turkeyman@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="gmail_quote">On 22 January 2012 23:34, Andrei Alexandrescu <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org">SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On 1/22/12 3:18 PM, Manu wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On 22 January 2012 18:42, Sean Kelly <<a href="mailto:sean@invisibleduck.org" target="_blank">sean@invisibleduck.org</a><div class="im"><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:sean@invisibleduck.org" target="_blank">sean@invisibleduck.org</a><u></u>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
The popularity of a language has no bearing on the quality of one of<br>
its features. Are there other message passing schemes you prefer?<br>
<br>
<br></div><div class="im">
As said in the original post, I think receiveOnly() is the most<br>
intuitive API. I just think that one should be named receive(), and<br>
perhaps receive() may be renamed receiveMulti(). Surely that would be<br>
more intuitive to more people?<br>
</div></blockquote>
<br>
Names will not change.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Why? Surely API's being as intuitive as possible should be a key goal for a standard library?</div><div>The thing isn't supposed to be stable yet is it? If you take the attitude that no name should ever be changed, then I think there is a problem with the phobos contribution process.</div>
<div>Phobos contributions have basically no incubation time/process. I've seen others suggest new stuff should go in exp.xxx to incubate, and it should only be promoted to std after some time, or some successful usage in multiple large-ish projects?</div>
<div>It's a shame that basic usability things like that couldn't be caught earlier.</div><div><br></div><div>Do you disagree that receive() and receiveMulti() (with the crazy var-arg-of-delegates API that nobody would have ever seen in any popular language before) is a far more intuitive approach?</div>
<div>C# is awesome because it gets this right. I think that's its single greatest achievement, and can not be understated.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Also both Only and Multi varieties should have a Timeout version, and I<br>
would love to see a poll()/pollMulti() function.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
This is sensible. You may want to add functions through pull requests, or make enhancement requests on bugzilla.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Shall do one or the other.</div></div>
</div></blockquote></body></html>