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

Attachment: 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

Reply via email to