> On 4 Sep 2017, at 15:04, Frediano Ziglio <fziglio@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 06:06:57AM -0400, Frediano Ziglio wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 06:19:28AM -0400, Frediano Ziglio wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> red_channel_disconnect_if_pending_send() and >>>>>> red_channel_wait_all_sent() >>>>>> are >>>>>> always called together, we can remove one of the 2 methods. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Looks a good idea but I think that the function deserve a new name >>>> >>>> I would not know how to change the name though :-/ >>>> >>> >>> Mumble... red_channel_goodbye_bad_guys ? :-) >>> More serious red_channel_disconnect_slow_clients. >> >> Oh wait, were you talking about >> red_channel_disconnect_if_pending_send()? >> I thought you wanted to rename red_channel_wait_all_sent() >> >> Christophe >> > > Yes, red_channel_wait_all_sent. The callers at the end with the > new function will get this service, right? The wait is a "detail" > that can be documented as the way to detect the slow ones. I like both new names you suggested. Makes it much easier to understand the intent. > > Frediano > _______________________________________________ > Spice-devel mailing list > Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel