Re: GObject-Introspection 0.5.0
Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]> Mon, 08 Sep 2008 09:24:44 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gnome.gtk+.devel.general,gmane.comp.gnome.language-bindings |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote: > 2008/9/7 Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]>: >>>> I'm leaning towards using the "ownership" terminology instead of "transfer". >>>> typedef enum { >>>> GI_OWNERSHIP_CALLER, /* caller owns it, caller should free it after use */ >>>> GI_OWNERSHIP_CALLEE /* callee owns it, caller should leave it as it is */ >>>> } GITypeOwnership; >>> Just as a nitpick, these two names look very similar and quite confusing >>> for non-native English speakers. Maybe you could come up with something >>> different, especially in place of 'callee'? >> It's actually commonly-used terminology, e.g. "caller-save registers" >> vs. "callee-save registers" in compilers. > > With all due respect I am not sure compiler-writers are the main > audience of GObject Introspection. I for one find the terminology a > bit confusing too. What about "employer" and "employee" instead? :-) Paolo