Re: Introspection API

Havoc Pennington <[email protected]> writes:

> On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 17:38 +0800, James Henstridge wrote:
>> At the same time, C header files are missing a lot of the information 
>> you'd want to include in the metadata.  You'll either end up with a lot 
>> of ugly comments in the header (for an extreme case, look at something 
>> like librpm's headers ...), or have the information separate from the 
>> definitions (which can result on them becoming out of date).
>
> I think magic comments are the way to go. The way to minimize them is to
> follow the conventions. If an API is "normal" then all the defaults
> should be right -> no magic comments. Right?
>
I don't know what you consider "normal", but a lot of functions could
use default arguments, and those must be encoded in magic comments,
no?

Rotty
-- 
Andreas Rottmann         | Rotty@ICQ      | 118634484@ICQ | [email protected]
http://yi.org/rotty      | GnuPG Key: http://yi.org/rotty/gpg.asc
Fingerprint              | DFB4 4EB4 78A4 5EEE 6219  F228 F92F CFC5 01FD 5B62

A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion
Q. Why is top posting bad?
_______________________________________________
language-bindings mailing list  [email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/language-bindings