| Summary: | tp_proxy_has_interface not introspectable | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Telepathy | Reporter: | Danielle Madeley <danielle> |
| Component: | tp-glib | Assignee: | Simon McVittie <smcv> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | Telepathy bugs list <telepathy-bugs> |
| Severity: | enhancement | ||
| Priority: | medium | Keywords: | patch |
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | Other | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| URL: | http://git.collabora.co.uk/?p=user/smcv/telepathy-glib-smcv.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/trivia | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| i915 platform: | i915 features: | ||
|
Description
Danielle Madeley
2010-06-25 00:25:11 UTC
Fixed in my trivia branch, please review. All 6 ++ Although why (skip) the getters? Seems a little inconsistent since in general they're not skipped throughout the rest of the API. (In reply to comment #2) > All 6 ++ Sorry, forgot to close this; Guillaume reviewed the branch and also approved it. Fixed in git for 0.11.11. > Although why (skip) the getters? Seems a little inconsistent since in general > they're not skipped throughout the rest of the API. If we have properties, is there much/any value in having getters too, for g-i? For instance, in Python (assuming we bound this file at all): my_base_client.props.dbus_daemon my_base_client.get_dbus_daemon() I basically consider these duplicate getters to be "C bindings" for the properties, rather than a feature in their own right. Is that appropriate? (This is more of a concern for getters that are called borrow_foo or dup_foo because of their C semantics, which should basically be turned into "get" by bindings anyway - if we keep these visible, we need to be careful to have the g-i name for these be appropriate, perhaps with the "Rename to:" annotation, if that works these days.) |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.