[swift-evolution] [Accepted with Revision] SE-0088: Modernize libdispatch for Swift 3 naming conventions

[Patrick Smith]

Great stuff! Truly is a massive improvement to an already venerable API.

Was there any consideration to make this a new module ‘Dispatch’, and drop all the Dispatch- prefixes? Or rather, what is the reason for keeping the prefixes? (Group could become WorkGroup to lessen naming conflicts)


> On 20 May 2016, at 1:57 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> 
> Proposal link: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0088-libdispatch-for-swift3.md
> 
> Hello Swift Community,
> 
> The review of "SE-0088: Modernize libdispatch for Swift 3 naming conventions" ran from May 10…17, 2016. The proposal is *accepted with revisions* for Swift 3.
> 
> The community and core team are both very positive about this massive improvement to the libdispatch APIs.  Much of the discussion has centered around specific details in the proposal - for example the “.asynchronously” method on DispatchQueue.  This great discussion leads to several requested revisions in the proposal:
> 
> - Rename the DispatchQueue.[a]synchronously methods to ".async” and ".sync”, to follow the term of art.
> - Rename DispatchIO setHighWater, setLowWater --> setLimit(highWater:), setLimit(lowWater:)
> - Rename setTargetQueue(queue:) and DispatchSource.setTimer 
> - Rename Semaphore, Group and WorkItem: .wait(timeout:) --> wait() and wait(withTimeout:)
> - Expand source handler methods to take the same arguments as async()
> - Expand DispatchQueue.after to take the same arguments as async() in addition to the when: argument
> 
> Thank you to Matt Wright proposing this, and for all of the implementation work that has gone into this so far!
> 
> -Chris Lattner
> Review Manager
> 
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution