[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: We have asynchronous sessions, why have anything else?

From: Ihor Radchenko
Subject: Re: We have asynchronous sessions, why have anything else?
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2022 19:17:26 +0800

Ivar Fredholm <freddyholms@protonmail.com> writes:

> Hi Ihor, I have a prototype of what I mentioned earlier, at least for python. 
> This supports asynchronous, synchronous, session, and session-less blocks. 
> It's pretty messy but it helps to illustrate what I had in mind. Let me know 
> what you think.

I am not sure how I feel about it.
>From cursory look, the idea looks reasonable implementation-wise.

However, there is one big important requirement which does not appear to
be obeyed by your code: We _must_ be backwards-compatible. All the
existing babel backends must not be broken, especially third-party ones.
We must not make breaking changes to non-private function definitions.

Also, I do not see error handling as it is implemented in our current
babel code: Errors should be displayed in a popup buffer.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]