Re: [PATCH 0/6] Misc fixes and improved annotations

[Simón Pena Placer <spenap gmail com>]

> Hi,
>
> Please note that "(transfer full)" is a default annotation. In most
> cases, g-ir-scanner will guess the correct values using the predefined
> annotations [1]. There is no need to annotate everything, but *only*
> these symbols for which the default, guessed annotations are incorrect
> or ambiguous.

Yes, you're right. In those specific cases Iago mentions,
"transfer-full" was an annotation already present: I just added the
"element-type" annotations so that the functions became
introspectable, but missed the "transfer mode" (which then I should
have set to "container")

> If we annotate all symbols including those which can be guessed
> correctly, we will have tons of annotation code to maintain. We really
> don't want that.

I agree on that, and have already removed some other unnecessary
annotations (I need to do a more complete work on that, as I think
utf8 is also the default type for gchar, but it's still present in
lots of annotations).

However, and as a side effect of talking to Adrian about his work on
Lua GI bindings [1], I found that something has changed in gobject
introspection from the latest release (I was used their latest tag in
their git repo) which prevents some of the functions from being
introspectable -when they were working previously. I'll try to find
out what it is, and find a fix.

Cheers,

Simón

[1] http://blogs.igalia.com/aperez/2010/09/some-thoughts-and-code-around-gobject-introspection/