Re: [anjuta-devel] Change project property interface

[Abderrahim Kitouni <a kitouni gmail com>]

Hello Sébastien,

              في ث، 08-11-2011 عند 21:35 +0100 ، كتب Sébastien Granjoux:
> I will do the following changes:
>
>
> * Change the following functions of IAnjutaProject interface (I think 
> nobody use them so I think it's not an issue to break the compatibility)
>
> AnjutaProjectProperty *ianjuta_project_set_property (AnjutaProjectNode 
> *parent, const gchar *id, const gchar *value); (transfer none)

I think this is really nice, but this wouldn't allow one to set a map
property, would it? Do we need to add a set_map_property? (I also like
the symmetry with anjuta_project_node_get_property and 
anjuta_project_node_get_map_property. The same goes for
anjuta_project_property_new below.

 
> gboolean ianjuta_project_remove_property (AnjutaProjectNode *parent, 
> const gchar *id);

Ok.

> * Change the following types:
>
> struct _AnjutaProjectProperty
> [...]
>
> struct _AnjutaProjectPropertyInfo
> [...]

Ok.

> struct _AnjutaProjectNode
> [..]

Ok.


> * Have the following function in anjuta-project.h
> [...]
>
> Is it ok to do at least all this?

Yes, this looks fine to me.

> Then a few other questions and remarks.
>
> * The anjuta_project_node_insert_property_info is perhaps not very 
> useful because at least in the autotools backend. The properties infos 
> list constant and shared but all node of the same type. So it will be 
> rather
>
> void anjuta_project_node_insert_property_info (
>       AnjutaProjectNode *node,
>       GList *info);

* I'd prefer to have the list owned by the node, so I don't really like
this.
* Regarding having something shared between all the objects of the same
type, they could be put in the AnjutaProjectNodeClass struct. This is
used in gtk, so I think it should work well with introspection. We
should probably test it first. The method would then be
void anjuta_project_node_class_insert_property_info (
        AnjutaProjectNodeClass *klass,
        AnjutaProjectPropertyInfo *info);

> Anyway, one backend could use a custom list for each node.

I don't know, maybe we should allow this.


> * Do I need to add set and get function for all attributes of property 
> and property info object?

I think a property info could be considered constant and thus doesn't
need setters. Property could use setters. Getters are not strictly
necessary but may be a good idea for symmetry.

> * Some function of the anjuta-project.h are "public" and can be used by 
> any plugin by example anjuta_project_node_get_property. While other are 
> "private" and are usable by a backend plugin only by example 
> anjuta_project_node_insert_property (other plugins have to use 
> ianjuta_project_set_property instead).
>
> I think I need at least to separate them in the header file. But do you 
> think we need to move them to a separate header or do you have a better 
> idea to make this different more clear? By the way, I don't know if it's 
> clear for you.

I think it is enough to add a note in the documentation comments stating
that this function should only be used by backend implementation.

Regards,
Abderrahim