Re: RFC: Operation Options API proposal

[Guillaume Emont <gemont igalia com>]

On 29/03/2011 16:23, Iago Toral wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 16:09:26 +0200, "Juan A." Suárez Romero
> <jasuarez igalia com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 13:43 +0000, Iago Toral wrote:
>>> > Uhm... I think I'm not getting what do you mean by "multi-valued
>>> > options".
>>> >
>>> > Do you mean setting for instance a filter with with ARTIST and
>>> ALBUM
>>> > in
>>> > just one call?
>>>
>>>  No. I mean being able to assign multiple values to the same option,
>>>  whether you use one call or various for that is another topic.
>>
>> If by "option" you mean "filter-artist" or "filter-album", then I guess
>> we are going a bit beyond what we talked about.
> 
> No, by option I mean "filters" in plural. I am talking about an option
> (just one) called "filter", that can have multiple values (each one an
> independent filter, like a filter by artist, a filter by date, etc). It
> is explained in my previous email.

Can't the value be a list of filters then? Anyway, the model I presented
provides a way to store options (the _set_value()/_get_value()) as a
facility to implement "simple" options, but stuff can be stored
differently in ->priv, in whatever shape you want. As for the API, you
can add the convenient API that you need.
The only thing is that we need to think carefully how we shape the first
ones (filtering and sorting), because the next ones we will add will
want to be consistent with that.

> 
> Iago
> _______________________________________________
> grilo-list mailing list
> grilo-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/grilo-list