Re: Introspection

[Matthias Clasen <mclasen redhat com>]

On Mon, 2005-01-10 at 13:27 -0500, Dan Winship wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-01-10 at 12:03 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > We should probably not cover all irregularities of C apis (varargs come
> > to mind).
> 
> It would be good to at least mention these irregular cases in the
> metadata even if they aren't fully described, so that if you're
> automatically generating bindings, the generator can print out warnings
> telling you that you need to wrap those methods by hand.

Hmm, who would mention them, the header scanner ? Maybe, but eg 
varargs functions can really only be convenience in properly
bindable apis anyway, so there should be no need to wrap them manually.

> > * type information for parameters and return value
> 
> Lots of methods use "GtkWidget *" as a parameter or return type when the
> actual type required/returned is something more specific. The metadata
> should indicate that.

Yes. I think this is most commonly the case for constructors.

> > Boxed types
> > * fields 
> >   - type
> >   - struct offset
> 
> Some object types have public fields as well. As with properties, it
> would be useful to have explicit links between object/boxed fields and
> their accessor methods.

If a filed of an object has to be introspectable, it should be exposed
as a property. Why invent a new kind of second-class properties ?

Matthias