On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 13:30 +0100, Amos Brocco wrote: > Il giorno gio, 20/03/2008 alle 11.30 +0100, Alexander Larsson ha > scritto: > > On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 10:18 +0100, Amos Brocco wrote: > > > > Not sure what would happen > > > > if you trashed two files of the same name from the same directory > > > > though, having to deal with the edge cases of the "_filename.2", > > > > "_filename.3" with the same original path if you're thinking about > > > > going that way though. > > > > > > By having GFile updating the uri/path information after g_file_trash it > > > wouldn't be difficult. For the undo I keep track of the "old uri", "new > > > uri" and the operation (copy, move, trash, etc.); if g_file_get_uri > > > returns the updated path (in the trash) I could just use the "orig-path" > > > attribute to get the original file. > > > > GFiles are immutable identifies, similare to a pathname string. This > > proposal is similar to having trash_file(char *filename) change the > > value of filename to the new location. It just doesn't work. > > > > Ok, I understand. What about g_file_trash returning the actual URI > (trash://...) instead of a boolean value (NULL if trashing failed)?
That would work fine... except we're now totally API/ABI frozen.... Kinda sucks. -- nautilus-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/nautilus-list
