| | | |class Efl.Loop_Consumer | | | |├ (P) loop | | | |├ (M) future_resolved | | | |├ (M) future_rejected | | | |├ (M) promise_new
|Duplicate||singh.amitesh||T5363 Cleanup elm_widget.eo|
@zmike I am not sure how to make a patch that takes Efl.Loop_Consumer out of BETA:
efl_loop_consumer.eo.h is included from Efl_Core.h unconditionally (there's no #ifdef BETA).
Efl.Core.h is included from Efl_Ui.h and Efl_Net.h unconditionally. Moreover, Efl_Ui.h defines EFL_BETA_API_SUPPORT.
Therefore, my understanding is that if an app is including Efl_Ui.h it is already implicitly requesting BETA support.
I actually tested with the texteditor example, and if it includes Efl_Ui.h before Eina.h or Elementary.h it does not need to define EFL_BETA_API_SUPPORT at all.
This looks convoluted and maybe worth fixing at some point, but, for the purpose of this ticket, I am not sure how to "take efl_loop_consumer" out of BETA".
I think probably no public header should define EFL_BETA_API_SUPPORT or else we have no ability to enforce beta-ness of apis. So this should be added to headers where it doesn't exist, and headers which don't have guards should have the guards added.
Then, for the purpose of this ticket, you can move this header out of the guard in another proposed patch.