Re: [Vala] Issues will vala and pulse vapi

[Aaron Paden <aaronbpaden gmail com>]

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 9:54 PM, Evan Nemerson <evan coeus-group com> wrote:
> That's not quite right; the VAPI shouldn't indicate that a *type* is
> "unmanaged"…  it's up to your code to indicate whether an instance is
> unowned.  However, the question is really what the proper way to
> destroy an instance is.
>
> In order to determine how to destroy a struct which doesn't specify a
> destroy_function CCode attribute, Vala will look at the members.  If
> none of the members require destroy or free functions, then Vala can
> assume that simply releasing the memory associated with the struct
> itself (i.e., calling g_free on heap-allocated instances, or simply
> allowing stack-allocated instances to go out of scope) is sufficient.

Hum. Sourceinfo (and SinkInfo) should not be freed at all, the C APIs
that retrieve them give you const pointers.