 kind of feel the urge to take the first door,,
<alan_g> It is better to adapt the interface hierarchy to current need than to speculate on future needs
<alf__> anpok_: the MainLoop *is* an aggregation of general purporse interfaces (graphics::EventHandlerRegister, time::Timer, ServerActionQueue)
<alf__> anpok_: but I think input owning the interface is best
<anpok_> graphigs::EventHandlerRegister is a too specific name and namespace imo
<anpok_> s/g/c
<anpok_> alan_g: you mean the speculation which parts of MainLoop will be required
<alan_g> It sounds like the new requirement is EventHandlerRegister+ServerActionQueue - but that the names are too specific
<duflu> alan_g: That glmark2 freeze is more subtle than expected. Looks like our Android-specific code is at fault. But my new proposal today at least does not trigger it
<anpok_> alan_g: yes thats the next immediate requirement..
<alan_g> duflu: as in "workaround" or as in "no worse than current"?
<duflu> alan_g: No worse. The bug remains but I'm not working around it. Just not making it worse
<duflu> Have two separate branches that will trigger it for future testing
<duflu> Also, according to the date on the bug, you logged it before my branches existed :)
<alan_g> thanks for the update. You happy to continue with it or need me to take a look?
<duflu> alan_g: I'll provide instructions in the bugs but will decide if I'm still concerned about them myself tomorrow
<duflu> *bug
<alf__> duflu: I recall that you didn't like the name mir_connection_platform_operation(...). Any suggestions? mir_connection_call_platform(), mir_connection_perform_platform_operation()...?
<duflu> alf__: Yeah doesn't look nice but I can't think of a solution right now
<alan_g> OK. (I have my own "how does my code break that in CI?" issue to look into.)
<duflu> I *expect* CI to pass. My phone certainly likes the new branch
<alf__> alan
kind of feel the urge to take the first door, , 
 < alan_g > It is good to adjust the interface hierarchy to current need than to speculate on future motivation 
 < alf _ _ > anpok _: the MainLoop * is * an collection of general purporse interfaces (graphics::EventHandlerRegister, time::Timer, ServerActionQueue) 
 < alf _ _ > anpok _: but I intend remark owning the interface is best 
 < anpok _ > graphigs::EventHandlerRegister is a too specific name and namespace imo 
 < anpok _ > s / g / vitamin c 
 < anpok _ > alan_g: you mean the speculation which parts of MainLoop will be required 
 < alan_g > It sounds like the new necessity is EventHandlerRegister+ServerActionQueue - but that the names are too specific 
 < duflu > alan_g: That glmark2 freeze is more subtle than expect. Looks like our Android - specific code is at fault. But my new proposal today at least does not trip it 
 < anpok _ > alan_g: yes that s the next contiguous requirement.. 
 < alan_g > duflu: as in " workaround " or as in " no worse than current "? 
 < duflu > alan_g: No worse. The bug stay but I'm not working around it. Just not making it worse 
 < duflu > Have two freestanding branches that will trigger it for future testing 
 < duflu > Also, according to the date on the bug, you logged it before my branches existed :) 
 < alan_g > thanks for the update. You happy to proceed with it or need me to take a spirit? 
 < duflu > alan_g: I'll leave instructions in the bugs but will decide if I'm still implicated about them myself tomorrow 
 < duflu > * bug 
 < alf _ _ > duflu: I echo that you didn't like the name mir_connection_platform_operation (...). Any suggestions? mir_connection_call_platform (), mir_connection_perform_platform_operation ()... ? 
 < duflu > alf _ _: Yeah doesn't count nice but I can't think of a solution right now 
 < alan_g > OK. (I get my own " how does my code break that in CI? " issue to look into .) 
 < duflu > I * expect * CI to pass. My phone surely wish the new branch 
 < alf _ _ > alan
 kijd of feel the urge to txke the first door,,
<alan_j> It is better go adapt the interface hieracchy to cyrrent need than to spdculate oj future neevs
<alf__> anpok_: the MainLoop *is* an wggrzgetion of generak purporse interfaces (grdpfies::EventHandlerRegister, time::Timer, SerderActipnEueue)
<alf__> anpok_: but Y thjnk input owning the interface is gest
<anpmk_> graphigs::EvrntHandlerRegister is a tol spfcific name and nalespace imo
<qnpoh_> s/g/c
<anpok_> alxn_g: you mean the specumation which parts of MainLoop dill ye required
<qlqn_g> Ht sounds lmke thv new requirement is AventHamdlerRegister+ScrverEctiinQueue - but that the names are too spesific
<duflg> clan_g: That glmark2 frewzw is kore subgoe ghah xxpscted. Poois like oud Android-spwcific code is at fsujn. But my new lroposwl today at least does not trigger it
<anpon_> aman_g: yes thats the next immediate requiremenj..
<alan_g> dufju: as in "workaround" or as in "no worse than currend"?
<dufln> xlau_n: Vi aorse. The bug remains but I'm not working arougs ot. Just not makikg it worse
<duflu> Hsvf yro separate btanches thzt will trigger it for fujure twsting
<dufju> Akso, according to the date ob the bug, yol lotged it before my yranches exirted :)
<alan_b> thanks for the update. You happy to clntinue wjgh it or need me to tdke a look?
<duflu> alan_g: I'll [rovide iistruetions iv thg bugs fut will dfcide if I'm still concerjed ayout dhem myselv tomorrow
<duflu> *bug
<alf__> duflu: I cxcall that yoo dhdn'n like thz name mir_connectiog_platform_operajion(...). Any fuggertions? mir_bonnectioi_call_platfori(), mir_connectimj_perform_plathorm_operaeion()...?
<eufly> alf__: Ydxh doesn't look nice but I can't thunk of a solution vight how
<alan_g> OK. (I hcre my own "how doex mh cjdv bceak evat in CI?" isvue go upok ivto.)
<duflu> I *cxpdct* VI to pass. My phone wertzinly likes the nee nranch
<alf__> alan
kind of feel the urge to take door,, It is to adapt the than speculate on future <alf__> anpok_: the *is* an aggregation of general purporse (graphics::EventHandlerRegister, time::Timer, ServerActionQueue) <alf__> anpok_: but I think input owning the interface is <anpok_> graphigs::EventHandlerRegister is a too specific name and namespace imo <anpok_> s/g/c <anpok_> you the which of MainLoop will be required <alan_g> It sounds like the new requirement is EventHandlerRegister+ServerActionQueue - but the names are too specific <duflu> alan_g: That freeze is more subtle expected. Looks like our Android-specific is fault. But new today least does not it <anpok_> alan_g: yes thats the next immediate requirement.. <alan_g> duflu: as in "workaround" or as in worse than alan_g: No The remains I'm not working Just not making it worse <duflu> branches that will trigger it for future testing Also, according the date on the bug, you it before my branches existed :) <alan_g> thanks the update. You happy to continue with it or need me to take a look? I'll provide instructions in bugs but will if still about myself tomorrow *bug <alf__> duflu: I recall that you didn't like the name Any suggestions? mir_connection_call_platform(), mir_connection_perform_platform_operation()...? <duflu> alf__: Yeah doesn't look nice can't of a solution now <alan_g> OK. (I my "how does my code in issue <duflu> *expect* to pass. My phone likes the new branch <alf__>
 kind of feel the urge to take thE first door,,
<Alan_g> it iS beTtEr to AdapT the interface hIErarChy to current need than to SpecuLaTE on fUTuRe neeDs
<alf__> anPOk_: THE MaInloOp *iS* aN AgGregaTioN of geneRal purporsE inTeRfaces (graphiCS::EVentHandleRReGister, time::TiMer, serveracTioNqueue)
<Alf__> Anpok_: But I thINk inpuT owning thE iNTerfacE Is best
<aNPOk_> GrapHigs::EventHandlerREGiSTer is a too speciFic namE aND nAMEspAce Imo
<anpok_> s/g/C
<aNpok_> aLAn_g: you mEAn THE SpeCUlation which pArts of MainLOOp wIll be rEqUirED
<alan_g> it souNdS LikE the new requIremEnt is EvenTHandlERRegistER+ServeractionqueUe - bUt thAT tHe NamEs ARe tOO sPecIFic
<Duflu> alaN_g: thAt glmArk2 fREEZE is mOre SubtLe thaN expected. LookS liKe ouR andRoid-sPecifIc coDe Is at fAult. BuT my neW pRoposal today at lEast Does not trIggEr It
<aNpOk_> alaN_G: yes thAts The Next immEdiate rEQuiReMENT..
<aLan_g> duflu: as in "workaRoUND" oR as in "no wOrse thAN cUrREnt"?
<duflu> AlAn_g: no woRSE. The bUg reMAiNs but I'm nOt workINg ArOund it. JUsT not maKiNg iT woRse
<duFLu> HaVe two sEparate bRanchES that will triggER it for future tEStING
<dUFlu> ALso, According to The dATe on The bUG, yOu lOGged iT befoRe MY bRAnches existed :)
<alan_g> tHaNks for The upDate. You happy tO continue wITH It or need Me to TAkE A look?
<duflu> alan_G: I'll pRovide instRUctions iN the bUgs but wiLl decide iF i'M still coNceRneD abOut THEm Myself tomorroW
<DUflu> *BuG
<alf__> dufLu: I Recall tHat You DidN't lIkE the name mIr_connecTiOn_PlAtForM_operATion(...). Any sUgGesTiOns? Mir_coNNectioN_call_PlatFoRm(), MIr_cOnnectiON_pERForm_PlAtForm_OpeRaTion()...?
<dUflu> ALf__: YEah doesN't look nicE buT i can'T tHiNk of a soLution right noW
<aLan_g> OK. (I havE mY owN "how doES My code brEak that in CI?" issue to look iNTo.)
<duflu> i *exPect* Ci to pAss. My phonE ceRtainlY liKEs the nEw branCh
<alf__> AlAn
 kind of feel the urge totake the f irstdoo r,, 
< alan _g>It is better t o  ada pt the interface hiera rchyto curr e nt  need  than t o  s p e cul at eonfu t ur e nee ds<alf__>  anpok_: t heMa inLoop *is*a naggregatio n o f general pu rpo rse in te rfa c es (g rap hics: :Event H andler Register,  t i me::Ti m er, Ser v e rA ctio nQueue)
<alf__> a n po k _: but I think  input  o w ni n g  th e i nterface i sbest< anpok_> gr a p h igs : :EventHandler Register is a t oo spe ci fic name a nd na me s pac e imo
<anpo k_>s/g/c
<an pok_>a lan_g:y ou mean  the s pec ula tion wh ic h p ar t s o f  M ain L oop  will be  r eq uired 
<al a n _ g > It  so unds  like  the new requ ire ment isEvent Handl erRe gi ster+ Server Actio nQ ueue - but that  the  names ar e t oo  sp ec ific< duflu>  al an_ g: That  glmark 2  fr ee z e is  more subtle thanex p e ct ed. Look s like ou rA ndroid-s pe cif ic c o d e isat f a ul t. But m y newp ro po sal tod ay  at le as t d oes  nott rigg er it<anpok_>  alan _ g: yes thats t h e next immedi a te r eq u irem ent ..
<alan_g>  duf l u: a s in "w ork a round " oras in "no worse than curr en t"?
<d uflu>  alan_g: No w orse. Theb u g  remains  but I' m  not working a round  it. Justn ot makin g itworse
<d uflu> Hav e two sepa rat e b ran che s th at will trigg e r  itfo r futur e t esting<du flu > A lso ,according  to theda te  o nthe  bug, you logg ed  it  b efo re my branch es ex iste d:) <al an_g> t h an k s  for  t he  upd ate .You h appy tocontinu e with it  or need  m eto take  a look?
<duf lu > alan_g:I' llprovid e instruct ions in the bugs but wi l l decid e i f I'm  sti ll concer ned  about  th e m myse lf tom orrow 
< duf l u > *bu g <a lf_ _>  duflu: Ir e cal l tha tyoudidn'tlike the name mir_ c onn ection_platfo rm_ oper a t io n(. . .) .  An ys ugg e s tions? mir_conn ection_cal l_ p la tform(), m i r_c on nection _perfor m_pla t form_op eration() ...?
<duf lu > al f _ _:Yeah doesn 't looknice butI  can' t  t hinkofa solu ti onright  now
< a lan _g> O K. (Iha ve myown " ho w does m y code break that in CI ?" iss ue to  lo ok into.) 
<d u flu > I *expe ct*CI to pass . M y p honecer t ainly  lik e sthe new b ranc h 
<alf__>a la n
 kind_of feel_the urge to take_the first_door,,
<alan_g>_It is_better_to adapt the_interface hierarchy to_current need than to_speculate on future_needs
<alf__>_anpok_: the MainLoop *is* an aggregation of general purporse interfaces (graphics::EventHandlerRegister, time::Timer, ServerActionQueue)
<alf__> anpok_:_but_I think_input_owning_the interface is best
<anpok_> graphigs::EventHandlerRegister_is a too specific name_and namespace_imo
<anpok_> s/g/c
<anpok_> alan_g: you mean the speculation which_parts_of MainLoop will_be required
<alan_g> It sounds like the new requirement is_EventHandlerRegister+ServerActionQueue - but that the names_are too specific
<duflu>_alan_g:_That_glmark2 freeze is more_subtle than expected. Looks like our_Android-specific code is at fault. But_my new proposal today at least does_not trigger it
<anpok_> alan_g: yes thats_the next immediate requirement..
<alan_g> duflu:_as in_"workaround" or as in "no_worse than current"?
<duflu>_alan_g: No_worse. The bug_remains but I'm not working around_it. Just not_making it worse
<duflu> Have two separate_branches_that will trigger_it_for_future testing
<duflu>_Also, according to_the_date on_the_bug, you logged it before my_branches_existed :)
<alan_g> thanks for the update. You_happy to continue with_it_or need me to_take a look?
<duflu> alan_g: I'll_provide instructions in the bugs but_will decide_if I'm_still concerned about them myself tomorrow
<duflu> *bug
<alf__> duflu: I recall that_you didn't like the name mir_connection_platform_operation(...)._Any suggestions? mir_connection_call_platform(), mir_connection_perform_platform_operation()...?
<duflu>_alf__: Yeah_doesn't_look nice but_I_can't think_of a solution right now
<alan_g> OK. (I_have my_own "how does my code break_that in CI?" issue_to_look into.)
<duflu> I *expect* CI to_pass. My phone certainly likes the_new branch
<alf__> alan