Hey, If you have some output showing the errors gobject-introspection gives you when you run it on libical, I might be able to help you fix them.
Philip On Wed, 2014-05-14 at 20:13 -0400, Miao Yu wrote: > Hi, > > > If I am not wrong, it is because the gobject-introspection has a hard > time in introspecting a third-party types, as those in libical. For > now, the only solution I can come up with is, as Milan said, to create > a proxy type for every type of libical which is used in EDS. After > that, I have to replace the libical types with the newly-created > introspectable proxy type in the API, which causes the disaster. And > this solution is, in nature, to write a introspectable wrapper for the > libical library. So that's why Milan want to put this under GObject so > that other applications can also use it instead of the libical. > > > And your solution is a nice way to fix that. Actually the focus can > also be put on the gobject-introspection. And gobject-introspection > can work with libical. Due to lack of experience, I cannot say which > one is better for now. But they can work to the same end. But if we > focus on the gobject-introspection, the introspection is not more > focusing solely on the gobjects since libical is a third-party > library. > > > Thank you. > > William Yu > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Philip Withnall <phi...@tecnocode.co.uk> > To: Milan Crha <mc...@redhat.com> > Cc: evolution-hackers <evolution-hackers@gnome.org>; will.yu > <will...@aol.com> > Sent: Wed, May 14, 2014 1:16 pm > Subject: Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introspection enablement for libecal > - huge changes needed? > > On Wed, 2014-05-14 at 15:34 +0200, Milan Crha wrote: > > The current problem is > > libical, its icalcomponent, enums and all other structures. I thought > > that we will be able to introspect this with simple boxed types, but it > > doesn't seem to be possible, thus the only option I can see is to > > massively change API of the calendar and define proxies for libical > > structures and enums. These proxies would be fully GObject-based, which > > might be a plus, I hope. > > What exactly is the problem with introspecting libical? If it's a > fixable problem with gobject-introspection, I suspect it would be less > work (and a better overall outcome) if time were put into fixing > gobject-introspection so that libical *can* be introspected; rather than > putting more work into a wrapper library which will increase memory > overheads and require maintenance. > > Philip
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ evolution-hackers mailing list evolution-hackers@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers