Re: [E-devel] Eolian property setters with return values
Hi, I think either proposal is reasonable. In the case where "bool return on property set indicates success", this can be enforced in eolian since it's a combination of property+typereturn, and it can be documented (and expanded on automatically in doc generation) to be more descriptive for anyone reading the documentation. It seems to me that, from an intuitive perspective, this would already make sense to anyone at a glance anyway. As for having an error_return flag/type, this also seems fine from a functional and documentation perspective, though it feels a bit strange and not-intuitive to have a different keyword/return type specific to property set methods than is used for methods which return bool. Regards, Mike On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 12:01 PM Tom Hacohen wrote: > > > On 21/10/2019 18:54, Xavi Artigas wrote: > >> > >> Maybe in general we need a way to mark a return/parameter as an error > >> indicator? It's just a half-baked thought, though maybe worth exploring. > >> > > > > There's already a couple of ideas on Phab in this direction: Add custom > > tags to Eolian ( https://phab.enlightenment.org/T8294 ) or use > Eina.Error > > instead of bool when the setter intends to actually return an error. > > To avoid breaking API in the second case, we could use a "lightweight > eina > > error" which is actually a boolean (as Marcel suggests). > > I just thought that if we could agree that setters returning bools always > > mean "error", we could avoid the extra complexity. > > Sure, though just a convention is not enough. You need to have them > properly marked so it can be enforced by Eolian and that people who are > writing (and reading!) these interfaces know this what it means. > > -- > Tom > > > > > Xavi > > > > > >> > >> -- > >> Tom > >> > >> On 21/10/2019 17:49, Xavi Artigas wrote: > >>> Hi people, > >>> > >>> We are encountering a problem when matching EO properties to C# > >> properties, > >>> since the C# ones cannot have a return value. > >>> > >>> We mostly use return values in EO property setters to indicate error > >>> conditions and this is pretty easily matched to C# by throwing an > >>> exception. We just need to know WHEN a returned bool from a setter > really > >>> means ERROR and when it is not. > >>> Currently, all property setters in our tree returning a bool use it to > >>> indicate an error, so it is just a matter of we all agreeing that in > the > >>> future this will always be the case (and documenting it). > >>> If we agree on this, then the C# bindings can start throwing exceptions > >> on > >>> setters returning FALSE (there's a patch ready, but I cannot access it > >>> right now). > >>> > >>> If nobody has anything against it, I'll land this patch in a week > >> (October > >>> 28th). > >>> > >>> Thanks! > >>> Xavi > >>> > >>> ___ > >>> enlightenment-devel mailing list > >>> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > >>> > >> > >> > >> ___ > >> enlightenment-devel mailing list > >> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > >> > > > > ___ > > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > ___ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > ___ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
Re: [E-devel] Eolian property setters with return values
On 21/10/2019 18:54, Xavi Artigas wrote: >> >> Maybe in general we need a way to mark a return/parameter as an error >> indicator? It's just a half-baked thought, though maybe worth exploring. >> > > There's already a couple of ideas on Phab in this direction: Add custom > tags to Eolian ( https://phab.enlightenment.org/T8294 ) or use Eina.Error > instead of bool when the setter intends to actually return an error. > To avoid breaking API in the second case, we could use a "lightweight eina > error" which is actually a boolean (as Marcel suggests). > I just thought that if we could agree that setters returning bools always > mean "error", we could avoid the extra complexity. Sure, though just a convention is not enough. You need to have them properly marked so it can be enforced by Eolian and that people who are writing (and reading!) these interfaces know this what it means. -- Tom > > Xavi > > >> >> -- >> Tom >> >> On 21/10/2019 17:49, Xavi Artigas wrote: >>> Hi people, >>> >>> We are encountering a problem when matching EO properties to C# >> properties, >>> since the C# ones cannot have a return value. >>> >>> We mostly use return values in EO property setters to indicate error >>> conditions and this is pretty easily matched to C# by throwing an >>> exception. We just need to know WHEN a returned bool from a setter really >>> means ERROR and when it is not. >>> Currently, all property setters in our tree returning a bool use it to >>> indicate an error, so it is just a matter of we all agreeing that in the >>> future this will always be the case (and documenting it). >>> If we agree on this, then the C# bindings can start throwing exceptions >> on >>> setters returning FALSE (there's a patch ready, but I cannot access it >>> right now). >>> >>> If nobody has anything against it, I'll land this patch in a week >> (October >>> 28th). >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Xavi >>> >>> ___ >>> enlightenment-devel mailing list >>> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel >>> >> >> >> ___ >> enlightenment-devel mailing list >> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel >> > > ___ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > ___ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
Re: [E-devel] Eolian property setters with return values
On 21/10/2019 18:51, Marcel Hollerbach wrote: > On 10/21/19 5:37 PM, Tom Hacohen wrote: >> I agree it's most of them, though it's not all of them. IIRC there are >> some that indicate "nothing happened", at least in textblock. It >> shouldn't be too hard to fix these though. >> >> Maybe in general we need a way to mark a return/parameter as an error >> indicator? It's just a half-baked thought, though maybe worth exploring. > > Maybe some internal "error_flag" type from eolian, which can be > translated to a Exception in the languages supporting them, or to a > simple Eina_Bool in case of C ? Yeah, that's what I had in mind. Not necessarily Eina_Bool, it could be an int too, or probably whatever? error_return bool; or return bool @error; Not sure to be honest, needs thinking, but just generally what I had in mind. > It can only be returned (so exceptions do work). This would also not > mean a API/ABI break to C. Yup, defo. > >> >> -- >> Tom >> >> On 21/10/2019 17:49, Xavi Artigas wrote: >>> Hi people, >>> >>> We are encountering a problem when matching EO properties to C# >>> properties, >>> since the C# ones cannot have a return value. >>> >>> We mostly use return values in EO property setters to indicate error >>> conditions and this is pretty easily matched to C# by throwing an >>> exception. We just need to know WHEN a returned bool from a setter >>> really >>> means ERROR and when it is not. >>> Currently, all property setters in our tree returning a bool use it to >>> indicate an error, so it is just a matter of we all agreeing that in the >>> future this will always be the case (and documenting it). >>> If we agree on this, then the C# bindings can start throwing >>> exceptions on >>> setters returning FALSE (there's a patch ready, but I cannot access it >>> right now). >>> >>> If nobody has anything against it, I'll land this patch in a week >>> (October >>> 28th). >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Xavi >>> >>> ___ >>> enlightenment-devel mailing list >>> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel >>> >> >> >> ___ >> enlightenment-devel mailing list >> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel >> > > > ___ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel ___ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
Re: [E-devel] Eolian property setters with return values
> > Maybe in general we need a way to mark a return/parameter as an error > indicator? It's just a half-baked thought, though maybe worth exploring. > There's already a couple of ideas on Phab in this direction: Add custom tags to Eolian ( https://phab.enlightenment.org/T8294 ) or use Eina.Error instead of bool when the setter intends to actually return an error. To avoid breaking API in the second case, we could use a "lightweight eina error" which is actually a boolean (as Marcel suggests). I just thought that if we could agree that setters returning bools always mean "error", we could avoid the extra complexity. Xavi > > -- > Tom > > On 21/10/2019 17:49, Xavi Artigas wrote: > > Hi people, > > > > We are encountering a problem when matching EO properties to C# > properties, > > since the C# ones cannot have a return value. > > > > We mostly use return values in EO property setters to indicate error > > conditions and this is pretty easily matched to C# by throwing an > > exception. We just need to know WHEN a returned bool from a setter really > > means ERROR and when it is not. > > Currently, all property setters in our tree returning a bool use it to > > indicate an error, so it is just a matter of we all agreeing that in the > > future this will always be the case (and documenting it). > > If we agree on this, then the C# bindings can start throwing exceptions > on > > setters returning FALSE (there's a patch ready, but I cannot access it > > right now). > > > > If nobody has anything against it, I'll land this patch in a week > (October > > 28th). > > > > Thanks! > > Xavi > > > > ___ > > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > ___ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > ___ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
Re: [E-devel] Eolian property setters with return values
On 10/21/19 5:37 PM, Tom Hacohen wrote: I agree it's most of them, though it's not all of them. IIRC there are some that indicate "nothing happened", at least in textblock. It shouldn't be too hard to fix these though. Maybe in general we need a way to mark a return/parameter as an error indicator? It's just a half-baked thought, though maybe worth exploring. Maybe some internal "error_flag" type from eolian, which can be translated to a Exception in the languages supporting them, or to a simple Eina_Bool in case of C ? It can only be returned (so exceptions do work). This would also not mean a API/ABI break to C. -- Tom On 21/10/2019 17:49, Xavi Artigas wrote: Hi people, We are encountering a problem when matching EO properties to C# properties, since the C# ones cannot have a return value. We mostly use return values in EO property setters to indicate error conditions and this is pretty easily matched to C# by throwing an exception. We just need to know WHEN a returned bool from a setter really means ERROR and when it is not. Currently, all property setters in our tree returning a bool use it to indicate an error, so it is just a matter of we all agreeing that in the future this will always be the case (and documenting it). If we agree on this, then the C# bindings can start throwing exceptions on setters returning FALSE (there's a patch ready, but I cannot access it right now). If nobody has anything against it, I'll land this patch in a week (October 28th). Thanks! Xavi ___ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel ___ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel ___ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
Re: [E-devel] Eolian property setters with return values
I agree it's most of them, though it's not all of them. IIRC there are some that indicate "nothing happened", at least in textblock. It shouldn't be too hard to fix these though. Maybe in general we need a way to mark a return/parameter as an error indicator? It's just a half-baked thought, though maybe worth exploring. -- Tom On 21/10/2019 17:49, Xavi Artigas wrote: > Hi people, > > We are encountering a problem when matching EO properties to C# properties, > since the C# ones cannot have a return value. > > We mostly use return values in EO property setters to indicate error > conditions and this is pretty easily matched to C# by throwing an > exception. We just need to know WHEN a returned bool from a setter really > means ERROR and when it is not. > Currently, all property setters in our tree returning a bool use it to > indicate an error, so it is just a matter of we all agreeing that in the > future this will always be the case (and documenting it). > If we agree on this, then the C# bindings can start throwing exceptions on > setters returning FALSE (there's a patch ready, but I cannot access it > right now). > > If nobody has anything against it, I'll land this patch in a week (October > 28th). > > Thanks! > Xavi > > ___ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > ___ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
[E-devel] Enlightenment Developer Days call for proposals
Hello. As we are approaching roughly one month before EDD we should think about discussion and talk proposals for EDD. As I mentioned before I would like to have more discussions instead of lecture style talks. Bring a topic and prepare some slides to define the topic and questions that you want to discuss. The slides should be used to kickstart the discussions only. The discussion can later be followed up on the mailing list with notes from the EDD. If you want to update the attendees on a topic in a more lecture style talk that is possible as well. We have no formal program committee this year to decide on the proposals. Just mail me your topic and we can discuss it. I don't think there will be trouble time wise as we have 2 full days. Please send in the proposals no later than 31th of October. Title, short abstract and a time you would expect for it. As second topic for this mail I wanted to get some feedback on the food situation. We would have the opportunity to get some catering to bring food on site and we have the lunch there. To safe time and make sure we actually have a space to eat all together. This would be 15-20 EUR per person. The alternative is to go out, but we likely must reserve somewhere in advance to actually host > 10 people. For dinner on Saturday we should to out to a restaurant together. Xavi is also looking into the options we have there. If you have suggestions for this or restrictions we should take into account, please get in touch. regards Stefan Schmidt ___ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
[E-devel] Eolian property setters with return values
Hi people, We are encountering a problem when matching EO properties to C# properties, since the C# ones cannot have a return value. We mostly use return values in EO property setters to indicate error conditions and this is pretty easily matched to C# by throwing an exception. We just need to know WHEN a returned bool from a setter really means ERROR and when it is not. Currently, all property setters in our tree returning a bool use it to indicate an error, so it is just a matter of we all agreeing that in the future this will always be the case (and documenting it). If we agree on this, then the C# bindings can start throwing exceptions on setters returning FALSE (there's a patch ready, but I cannot access it right now). If nobody has anything against it, I'll land this patch in a week (October 28th). Thanks! Xavi ___ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
