Re: junctions for gconf

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

Frank Siebenlist <frank@eazel.com> writes:
> Trying to get up to speed with the gconf features and "the state of".
> 
> One trick that came to mind when I was browsing through the docs was the
> concept of so-called junctions in the namespace.
> A junction being defined as a node where a different animal than gconf
> may be responsible for the data represented in the nodes and attributes
> of the sub-tree underneath.
> 

I _think_ we could just have a "passwd" backend that did this. I could
be wrong. (There may also be some enhancements to the backend
interface that would make it work better.)
 
> PS. It has been a while since I've been counting parenthesis, but it may
> be that "cadr", as in (car (cdr pair)), is more appropriate that "cdr"
> in gconf_value_cdr()to get to the second element of the pair as cdr
> return the rest as a list and not as an "atom"... real lisp-heads may
> take offense ;-)
> 

cdr is the second element in a _pair_ though, that's a pair not a
list. i.e. (cons A B) where A and B are both atoms...

I should probably have called them first/second instead of car/cdr,
since most people aren't lisp-heads ;-)

Havoc