On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 17:37 -0500, muppet wrote:
> Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro said:
> > On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 15:38 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> >>Does it cover what is needed by language bindings ?
I probably wouldn't use an interface like this, but rather would
generate a "static" binding from the XML. So things like:
void g_virtual_method_override_class_closure (GType instance_type, const gchar
*name, GClosure *class_closure);
void g_virtual_method_invoke_base_closure (GType type, const gchar *name, const
GValue *instance_and_params, GValue *return_value);
are more important to Gtk#. Looks like the interface covers most of the
information I would need to generate Gtk#.
g_param_def should contain information about arrays too, because
is_pointer doesn't help much in that respect. For arrays with
corresponding length params it would be good to be able to identify
those by more than a shaky n_<name> convention.
> > Generally looks nice. But what about callback parameters?
> Should be handled by the GFunctionTypeDef corresponding to the callback's
> type, if i read the API correctly.
Doesn't quite cover it, because callback parameters have scope. Some
are call-duration, some are persistent, some are replace-on-next-call,
some are keep-one-per-2nd-param-value, some are
Mike Kestner <mkestner@xxxxxxxxxx>
gtk-devel-list mailing list