Re: [gnome-db] GdaValue sustitution for GValue

["Daniel Espinosa" <esodan gmail com>]

2006/3/29, Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>:

On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 11:23 -0600, Daniel Espinosa wrote:
> #define TIMEZONE_INVALID (2*12*60*60)

An unprefixed/un-namespaced #define like this does not belong in a
public header. It's namespace pollution.

> /* Definition of the GType's values used in GdaValue*/
>
> #define G_VALUE_TYPE_NULL G_TYPE_NONE
[snip]

I don't think that libgda should be defining things in the G_*
namespace. I don't understand anyway (they are not documented) why we
need these G_VALUE_TYPE* #defines as well as the GDA_VALUE_TYPE* enum
values.

[snip]

In the 1.2.* series, you found the types of values defined in a enum, and when I ported to GValue made it with the API compatibility in mind to not modify the code in the providers that use the enum in a switch function and if you use the #define (SOME_KIND_OF_TYPE) (gda_get__that_type()) definition, you can't use it in the switch clause, then you need to re-implement that code (much of work).

The name of G_VALUE_TYPE* was used to have a diference with the GDA_VALUE_TYPE* enum; in the GdaValue functions you use the G_VALUE_TYPE* to assing a valid G_TYPE to a GValue, and in some cases use the GDA_VALUE_TYPE to return or detect the type of G_TYPE in the GValue.

I think is better to deprecate the use of the GdaValueType, and use just the GDA_VALUE_TYPE* domain inside the API.
 

Otherwise, it looks the same as the existing GdaValue API, with some
functions removed because they are in the base GValue class.

I'm trying to don't modify the code a lot, but I think it'll not be possible becouse to have a API consistent with the GLib one, and not repeat functions that already exists, need to modify most of code.

-- 
Trabajar, la mejor arma para tu superación
"de grano en grano, se hace la arena" (R) (entrámite, pero para los cuates: LIBRE)