> The new API functions to access `ProjectPrefs` seem weird. For one, the > doc-comments are not useful, and might as well just be `/***/` since they > don't actual describe what the functions do at all, just what field of some > private undocumented struct they access is called. Moreover, usually in Geany > (for better or worse) we would expose the struct members directly to the API > using doc-comments (and obviously moving the struct out of the `#ifdef > GEANY_PRIVATE` guard).
They really do nothing else then changing the value of that struct item. That is part of the ProjectPrefs. The item set belongs to the config option _"Use project-based session files"_. But if usually the structure should be exposed then I will do that and change it. > I don't feel really strongly about accessor functions vs exposing the struct, > but it would be cool to fix the doc-comments so they explain what the > functions are for (I genuinely have no idea). Also if keeping the accessor > functions or not, it might be useful to take the opportunity to name the > functions/field something better since `project_session` as a boolean is not > a very good name. Something like `is_project_session` or > `project_session_deleted` or `dont_load_project_session` or whatever it's > actually for would be better, IMO. See above. I will remove the functions and try to find a better name for the struct item. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/geany/geany/pull/2234#issuecomment-517903494
