From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2205156689727942826=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Denis Kenzior <denkenz@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] gatchat: Emit notification when command is sent to
 modem.
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 08:31:47 -0500
Message-ID: <201004300831.47649.denkenz@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1272606483.22838.180.camel@localhost.localdomain>
List-Id: <ofono.ofono.org>
To: ofono@ofono.org

--===============2205156689727942826==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Marcel,

> Hi Denis,
> =

> > > +/*!
> > > + * Same as g_at_chat_send but with an ability to return a notificati=
on
> > > the + * moment the command finally leaves the queue and is submitted =
to
> > > lower + * layer.
> > > + *
> > > + * This is useful for cases where the modem's response time needs to
> > > be + * measured, assuming that the lower layers processing time is
> > > shorter + * than the minimum accuracy needed.
> > > + */
> > > +guint g_at_chat_send_with_callback(GAtChat *chat, const char *cmd,
> > > +					const char **valid_resp,
> > > +					GAtSubmitNotifyFunc sent,
> > > +					GAtResultFunc func,
> > > +					gpointer user_data,
> > > +					GDestroyNotify notify);
> > > +
> >
> > So I'm fine with the implementation but the name needs work.  Can we use
> > g_at_chat_send_with_submit_notify? Or maybe g_at_chat_send_full, similar
> > to how GLib does it.
> >
> > Perhaps enabling submit_notification for a given command after it has
> > been submitted with g_at_chat_send?
> >
> > e.g. g_at_chat_set_submit_notify(GAtChat *chat, guint command,
> > GAtSubmitNotifyFunc sent, gpointer user_data, GDestroyNotify notify);
> =

> I am not a huge fan of the _full() stuff, but it is actually pretty nice
> for the cases where 99% of users don't care. And this seems to be one of
> them. The send_with_submit_notify() is way too long.

I'm not a fan of _full either, however it is a precedent, so might as well =
be =

a candidate.

> =

> Maybe g_at_chat_send_and_notify() is an acceptable simple version for
> this or just g_at_chat_submit() and g_at_chat_send() to keep these
> versions apart.

In my opinion send_and_notify does not convey enough information about what =

the function is trying to do.  _submit is even less clear.  API should be v=
ery =

clear on its intent just from the function name without needing to consult =

documentation.

Out of all these so far my vote is on send_full just because it is familiar=
 to =

folks using GLib...  We might have to cut down some of the parameters to _s=
end =

as well (like GDestroyNotify argument) if we introduce send_full.

Regards,
-Denis

--===============2205156689727942826==--