[feedhenry-dev] Let's talk about Swift: async completion closure

[Máté Rácz]

Hi Corinne,

Somewhat unrelated, I always wondered why the ObjC API followed the JS API
so closely with blocks, instead of a more idiomatic syntax based on
protocols and delegates could possibly be more obvious for the end-users,
similar to how NSURLConnection is used. (I see there is an
FHResponseDelegate already, but it is only used internally by FHAct.)
If we changed the ObjC API that way, would it narrow down the choices for
the best syntax for the Swift API? The client code would look very much
like Summers' Java example, and a few indentation levels could be spared,
compared to using blocks.

Kind regards,
Máté

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 5:00 PM, <feedhenry-dev-request at redhat.com> wrote:

>
> @summers That would go even deeper in FRP.
> We should list it as:
> S4: More reactive way
> I don't have code snippet for it but i'll do some.
> btw all the other code snippets comes have an "trial" implementation [1].
> pro:
> Rx way fits for asynch data stream
> con:
> A bit far from the other Java/JS/C# existing syntax
>
> For the initial Swift SDK, I'd stick to S1 to be in sync with other
> language SDK.
> But I see where you're coming from Summers and I like the discussion. Let
> me come back to you with some Swifty code snippets.
> ++
> Corinne
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/feedhenry-dev/attachments/20160226/daea3b3a/attachment.htm>