Re: [anjuta-devel] Rethinking the AnjutaProjectNode API

[Sébastien Granjoux <seb sfo free fr>]

Hi Abderrahim,


Le 16/08/2011 15:05, Abderrahim Kitouni a écrit :
> I'm not asking for a change in behavior, the correct behavior is fine
> with me. Even if the source file is used by multiple targets, I could
> work with whatever target I get.
> What I was asking for is more cosmetic: changing the name of those
> functions so they appear as methods of the node in the bindings.

Ok.


> This is the solution I was thinking about. Another idea (that could be
> used in addition to this) is to use a hash table instead of a list to
> ease lookups, or maybe not: it might be enough to just have a
> lookup_property method.

I think we shouldn't have much properties so I don't think it's really 
useful to use a hash table.


> Yeah. If we add a new id string, would your solution still be useful for
> something (ans should be kept) or would it become completely useless?

My solution was to use additional members needed for something else. So 
even if I have an id string, they are still useful.

Then for the id string could you use a constant?
I mean that the id string is only the address of a constant. It even 
doesn't need to be a string and you check it with a pointer comparison.

Or do you need a real string?
I mean you have to check it using string comparison.


Regards,

Sébastien