Re: Thoughts on mm-common and gmmproc

On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 19:00 +0100, Krzesimir Nowak wrote:
> - I was wondering if current defs file format is all that great. Why
> not
> use XML for example? True, it can get quite lengthy, but there are
> lots
> of software parsing this stuff and format is rather quite reliable -
> unpaired parentheses and usage of double quotes in property docs
> aren't
> going to screw anything and <, >, & could be replaced with &smth;
> entities.
> - Generating defs file is the horror story. For signals defs - compile
> and run a little program, for enums defs - run an script, for
> methods defs -, for xml docs -, for
> vfuncs
> defs - just write them by hand. Le gasp! Also, some of these tools are
> not perfect or fine-tuned for mm-modules needs - pygobject's
> does not extract enum documentation,
> hickups on functions with a pointer to function as their parameter
> (some
> g_test function has them). I'd rather avoid writing Another Defs or
> Generating Tool to have enum docs. But frankly speaking this is sort
> of
> hard to resolve with one tool at first glance. Also, I recently tried
> to
> regenerate all defs for atkmm, gdkmm and gtkmm and in the end I got
> some
> cryptic error about end of file while wrapping GtkSettings, so
> updating
> defs is also painful. 

We hope to use the new .gir files, which should actually be correct and
widely shared:

However, I hope any gmmproc rewrite does the .defs/.gir switch as a
separate task. 

murrayc murrayc com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]