|author||Carsten Haitzler (Rasterman) <email@example.com>||2018-02-27 14:10:12 +0900|
|committer||Carsten Haitzler (Rasterman) <firstname.lastname@example.org>||2018-03-03 13:40:33 +0900|
|parent||eolian cxx,csharp: Update after eolian changes (diff)|
Revert "cxx: Fix manual code after efl_app change."
This reverts commit 135154303bea691c6f7f9472a5dec32d9103c38d. Revert "efl: move signal events from efl.loop to efl.app" This reverts commit 3dbca39f98288580c62a43c179ac11621433ec88. Revert "efl: add test suite for efl_app" This reverts commit 3e94be5d73256a7f5c02d3a9474173226be7beff. Revert "efl: create Efl.App class, the parent of Efl.Loop" This reverts commit 28fe00b94e55575c15684959b89a614d5a579309. Go back to before efl.app because I think this should be done with superclassing here not a parent object. reasons? 1. multiple loops per single thread make no sense. so if multilpe loop objects they wont be contained in a single app object and then deleted like this. 2. the app object is not really sharable in this design so it cant be accessed from other threads 3. it makes it harder to get the main loop or app object (well 2 func calls one calling the other and more typing. it is longer to type and more work where it is not necessary, and again it can't work from other threads unless we go duplicating efl.app per thread and then what is the point of splittyign out the signal events from efl.loop then?) etc.
Diffstat (limited to 'src/lib/ecore_file')
1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/src/lib/ecore_file/ecore_file_download.c b/src/lib/ecore_file/ecore_file_download.c
index fdbb405715..1323dbc8e6 100644
@@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ ecore_file_download_full(const char *url,
- loop = efl_app_main_loop_get(efl_app_get());
+ loop = efl_main_loop_get();
job = calloc(1, sizeof(Ecore_File_Download_Job));