Am 17.11.2010 00:22, schrieb Colomban Wendling: > Le 16/11/2010 23:32, Lex Trotman a écrit : >> On 17 November 2010 03:11, Frank Lanitz <fr...@frank.uvena.de> wrote: >>> On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:13:03 +0100 >>> Colomban Wendling <lists....@herbesfolles.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Le 16/11/2010 09:23, Frank Lanitz a écrit : >>>>> Well, agreed. In most cases it should work fine with compiled in >>>>> version number as most cases the API/ABI is changing with some >>>>> major release. But of course this will go into trouble with minor >>>>> releases as we had them with 0.19.1 or if anybody is remembering >>>>> the 10.x ones :) >>>>> >>>>> Well, however. I think a simple function which returns the version >>>>> string into plugin API would be enought or am I wrong? something >>>>> that is just doing a return GEANY_VERSION; >>>> I think it is better to return major, minor and micro version (or >>>> something that fits the versionning scheme) as plain integers. >>>> The advantage is that it becomes easy to use this version for any >>>> check, where a string is quite tedious to use. >>>> geany_get_version(gint *major, gint *minor, gint *micro) >>>> for example, or 3 variables, not sure. >>> Well, even it looks a bit dirty in my eyes (maybe we can put this into a >>> struct) it would solve users from use the parsing over and over again >>> as I did inside updatechecker with >>> static void parse_version_string(const gchar *ver, gint *major, gint >>> *minor, gint *micro, gchar **extra) >>> >>> So I'm pro ;) >> >> Just a question, shouldn't plugins be checking the ABI version was >> what they conpiled with not the Geany version? > I think this is not the question: Updatechecker wants to know the Geany > version to check whether there is a newer one, it's not a plugin > development need, but a goal.
Yes, I'd say this is right. > Of course, to check a functionality at runtime, a plugin should use the > API version (and then getting the Geany version is quite specific). Agreed. > BTW since you speak of this, I think API version should be made more > visible. The API version in which each function appeared should appear > in the doc rather than the Geany version it appeared in. This would make > easier for plugin developers to know for which version check. Well, I think its maybe better to have printed both, even this is causing a bunch of overhead. > Also, perhaps a compile-time check would be interesting, it would allow > things like "if Geany version is too old for this, it's not fatal, we > will do without" -- stop me if it already exists. This is not existing in a general view. Also I'm not 100% sure where this would make sense as you should always you up to date API. Maybe you can bring a litle light into darkness with an example. Cheers, Frank _______________________________________________ Geany-devel mailing list Geany-devel@uvena.de http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel