On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 17:37 -0500, muppet wrote: > Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro said: > > On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 15:38 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote: > >>Does it cover what is needed by language bindings ?
I probably wouldn't use an interface like this, but rather would generate a "static" binding from the XML. So things like: void g_virtual_method_override_class_closure (GType instance_type, const gchar *name, GClosure *class_closure); void g_virtual_method_invoke_base_closure (GType type, const gchar *name, const GValue *instance_and_params, GValue *return_value); are more important to Gtk#. Looks like the interface covers most of the information I would need to generate Gtk#. g_param_def should contain information about arrays too, because is_pointer doesn't help much in that respect. For arrays with corresponding length params it would be good to be able to identify those by more than a shaky n_<name> convention. > > Generally looks nice. But what about callback parameters? > > Should be handled by the GFunctionTypeDef corresponding to the callback's > type, if i read the API correctly. Doesn't quite cover it, because callback parameters have scope. Some are call-duration, some are persistent, some are replace-on-next-call, some are keep-one-per-2nd-param-value, some are removed-by-this-method... -- Mike Kestner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ language-bindings mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/language-bindings
