Hi Vishesh, FINALLY SOMEONE LOOKS AT THIS STUFF BESIDES ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THANK YOU! :)
On 05/07/2010 01:15 PM, Vishesh Handa wrote: > 1. The *Nepomuk::ResourceData::hasProperty( const QUrl& uri )* function > currently uses the MAINMODEL to answer. It think it should use the > cache, as it would be faster. The function *hasProperty( const QUrl& p, > const Variant& v ) *also uses the cache. A patch has been provided. yes, please commit. > 2. The *Nepomuk::ResourceData::removeProperty( const QUrl& uri )* > function doesn't update the cache. The setProperty function does. It > should be symmetrical. I think. also correct. Can you backport this one? > 3. In *Nepomuk::ResourceFilterModel::updateProperty( const QUrl& > resource, const QUrl& property, const Node& value )* shouldn't the line > if( it.hasNext() ) be a while( it.hasNext() ) ? I haven't tested it out, > but I think this is what should happen - > > Let's say I have a resource with a uri and certain properties. > > uri a rdf:Resource . > uri a rxx:A . > uri a rxx:B . > > and I call the function *updateProperty*( uri, rdf:type, rxx:C ). The > current implementation would get all the above 3 statements (I'm not > sure in what order) . Suppose it got /"uri a rdf:Resource/" first. It > would then proceed to remove the statement and add the /"uri a rxx:C" > /statement. This doesn't seem right. > > IMO, it should either delete all matching statements and add the one > specified in the arguments or it should take an oldValue and newValue > and accordingly change. KDevelop says it isn't used anywhere, so this > isn't really that important. :-/ You are correct. But as you said the method is not used anyway, so we better remove it. right? Cheers, Sebastian _______________________________________________ Nepomuk mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
