Re: RFC: Operation Options API proposal

["Juan A." Suárez Romero <jasuarez igalia com>]

On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 09:33 +0000, Iago Toral wrote:
> > :Comments: We might want reference counting on GrlOperationOptions, 
> > so that
> >            the application can choose between dropping its reference
> >            immediately (and not have to free the options when the
> > operation has
> >            terminated) or keep it to use the same
> GrlOperationOptions
> >            instance for several operations.
> 
>  That's a good point, but in that case should we not just go with 
>  GObject? If we actually decide that GrlCaps and GrlOptions should
> have a 
>  common ancestor as well, then that sounds like another reason
> advising 
>  the use of objects.
> 
> 

Well, my opinion is that we should go with gobjects right now. This
would make things safer if in future we need some gobject-capabilities
in the options (i'm thinking about reffing, for instance).


	J.A.