On 03/17/2015 02:18 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 03/17/2015 12:04 PM, John Snow wrote:
+typedef void (CallbackFn)(void *opaque, int ret);
+
+/* Temporary. Removed in the next patch. */
Actually, no. :-)
(remove in patch 7)
Why are you making them non-static in the first place? I see both
func
On 03/17/2015 12:04 PM, John Snow wrote:
>>> +typedef void (CallbackFn)(void *opaque, int ret);
>>> +
>>> +/* Temporary. Removed in the next patch. */
>>
>> Actually, no. :-)
>>
>> (remove in patch 7)
>>
>> Why are you making them non-static in the first place? I see both
>> functions mentioned in
On 2015-03-17 at 14:04, John Snow wrote:
On 03/17/2015 01:47 PM, Max Reitz wrote:
On 2015-03-04 at 23:15, John Snow wrote:
The goal here is to add a new method to transactions that allows
developers to specify a callback that will get invoked only once
all jobs spawned by a transaction are co
On 03/17/2015 01:47 PM, Max Reitz wrote:
On 2015-03-04 at 23:15, John Snow wrote:
The goal here is to add a new method to transactions that allows
developers to specify a callback that will get invoked only once
all jobs spawned by a transaction are completed, allowing developers
the chance to
On 2015-03-04 at 23:15, John Snow wrote:
The goal here is to add a new method to transactions that allows
developers to specify a callback that will get invoked only once
all jobs spawned by a transaction are completed, allowing developers
the chance to perform actions conditionally pending compl
The goal here is to add a new method to transactions that allows
developers to specify a callback that will get invoked only once
all jobs spawned by a transaction are completed, allowing developers
the chance to perform actions conditionally pending complete success
or complete failure.
In order
