Re: [DISCUSS] delete ra_neon

Justin Erenkrantz wrote on Sat, May 19, 2012 at 07:39:59 -0700:
> On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 7:25 AM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
> >> Ewww.  You are evil.  Go away, and come back when you are less evil.
> >>
> >> Just kidding.  But seriously ... evil.
> >
> > So why won't Ivan's idea work?
> >
> > (I assume it won't work, but now that it's been aired it would be nice
> > to hear from an ra_serf person _why_ it won't work.)
>
> Short answer: neon is a synchronous library while serf is an
> asynchronous library. The internal paradigms for ra_serf and ra_neon
> are completely different due to that. I wouldn't even want to think
> about trying to shoehorn one on top of the other...it's just evil. =)

Well, we could have a single ra_dav library with a backend_supports_synchronity
bitfield.

In theory, at least.

> -- justin
Received on 2012-05-19 16:56:04 CEST