Re: [Vala] GIO: nullable parameters, File object construction

[Jürg Billeter <j bitron ch>]

On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 12:09 +0200, Frederik wrote:
> I think in the GIO vapi bindings there are more parameters that should
> be marked as nullable. For example: "etag" as in File.replace() or
> "progress_callback" as in File.move().

Yes, we certainly still miss a lot of nullable annotations.

> btw, is it an inconsistency that File objects get constructed by
> 
> 	File.new_for_commandline_arg()
> 	File.new_for_path()
> 	File.new_for_uri()
> 
> instead of
> 
> 	new File.for_commandline_arg()
> 	new File.for_path()
> 	new File.for_uri()

No, that's intentional. GLib.File is an interface, not a class, and
interfaces never have creation methods. GLib.File.new_for_path() is a
static factory method, that uses the default Vfs to create an instance
of a class that implements GLib.File.

Jürg