[permission_handler] Support Tizen 4.0 #139
Conversation
| for (size_t i = 0; i < permissions_to_request.size(); i++) { | ||
| const char* permission = permissions_to_request[i]; | ||
| p.is_done = false; | ||
| result = ppm_request_permission( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
how about extracting this callback method?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well... this is close to my personal preference, I like to avoid adding unnecessary functions to class members or exposing them in headers and I generally prefer lambda functions unless they are used forever elsewhere.
However, I respect your opinion and it is possible :) Should I change it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
😃 this is also my preference, not a critical. I just found this lambda function too long to read.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've updated this PR
|
|
||
| // Wait until ppm_request_permission is done; | ||
| while (!p.is_done) { | ||
| ecore_main_loop_iterate(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As we said in our conversation, I don't think this is strange. I'm not sure if timeout is necessary here. I think we should listen to other people's opinions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If you have other reasonable ideas, please share it :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It seems only God can use this function according to its documentation. 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What a funny document! 😆
I'm not God, but there's nothing much the user can do when show pop-up for a permission, so I thought it was OK.
|
It's a little different story... |
I couldn't find any information related to the expiration of |
* Use ppm_request_permission instead of ppm_request_permissions * Now the requests are executed sequentially, one by one Signed-off-by: Boram Bae <boram21.bae@samsung.com>
| const char** privileges, size_t privileges_count, void* user_data) { | ||
| if (!user_data) { | ||
| LOG_ERROR("Invalid user data"); | ||
| void OnRequestPermissionsRespon(ppm_call_cause_e cause, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there any special reason why you shortened the name of this function?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you please refer to the conversation containing this comment?
When I changed this lambda function back to a named function, I made it a local function and excluded it from the class namespace.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OnRequestPermissionsResponse ->OnRequestPermissionsRespon
Oh!? Are you talking about this? My mistake! I'll fix it later when I get to work.
* Change a long lambda to local function to improve readability * Apply naming convention * Use enum class instead of enum * Use constexpr rather than macro Signed-off-by: Boram Bae <boram21.bae@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Boram Bae boram21.bae@samsung.com