Skip to content

Conversation

@taiki-e
Copy link
Member

@taiki-e taiki-e commented Apr 30, 2019

cc #1519

@taiki-e
Copy link
Member Author

taiki-e commented Apr 30, 2019

Blocked on #1533.

#1533 was merged.

use std::{cmp, fmt};
use super::DEFAULT_BUF_SIZE;

/// The `BufReader` struct adds buffering to any reader.
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

BufReader vs AsyncBufReader

(I have no strong opinion.)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Given it's a concrete type, and not a trait, I think BufReader is fine. It's similar to the naming scheme in Romio, Tokio, and Runtime 👍

Copy link

@ghost ghost May 6, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder if AsyncRead and AsyncWrite should've been named PollRead and PollWrite (because they only have polling read/write methods).

Then we could rename AsyncReadExt and AsyncWriteExt to simply Read and Write.

I don't see much point in the Async prefix if literally no other trait or type has it. Also, the Async* traits with polling methods are not indented to be used by end-users so it feels wrong for them to have simpler names than the *Ext traits which are used more often.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@stjepang that's an interesting point; perhaps opening a separate issue might be good for a discussion?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@stjepang the Async* traits are what should be used in bounds so likely used multiple times per file, whereas the *Ext traits should be imported and then be used via method syntax so only mentioned once per file.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Most relevant issue: #1398

@taiki-e taiki-e marked this pull request as ready for review May 3, 2019 00:54
@taiki-e taiki-e force-pushed the io-buf_reader branch 2 times, most recently from b69b486 to 1278df1 Compare May 4, 2019 01:29
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants