Re: GVariant for prez!

[Havoc Pennington <hp pobox com>]

Hi,

On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Christian Dywan <christian imendio com> wrote:
> Using G_TYPE_FOO in the API is imho a lot more agreeable than any new
> string signature. Sure it's more to type, but at the same time it's
> more comprehensible. :)
>

I don't disagree for C. One thing to note though, it isn't really more
comprehensible in Python or JavaScript or something, where otherwise
GType can pretty much be ignored.

In fact in Python or JS you're probably more likely to be looking at
some dbus or file format docs that use the serialized signatures in
the docs, than you are to be looking at GType-based docs. Having to go
JavaScript type -> GType -> serialized type is just an extra hoop.

I think it might be helpful to call the GVariant signature something
about binary format. What means "GBinaryLayoutDescription" but is
shorter? ;-)

Havoc