> b) Add the generic boundary now. The enum would be something like:
> typedef enum {
> ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_CHAR,
> ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_WORD_START,
> ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_WORD_END,
> ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_SENTENCE_START,
> ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_SENTENCE_END,
> ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_LINE_START,
> ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_LINE_END
> ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_WORD,
> ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_SENTENCE,
> ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_LINE
> } AtkTextBoundary;
why not define the enum like this
typedef enum {
ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_CHAR,
ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_WORD_START,
ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_WORD_END,
ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_SENTENCE_START,
ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_SENTENCE_END,
ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_LINE_START,
ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_LINE_END
ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_WORD = ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_WORD_START,
ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_SENTENCE = ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_SENTENCE_START,
ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_LINE = ATK_TEXT_BOUNDARY_LINE_START
} AtkTextBoundary;
Since the start and generic constants have the same meaning I don't see
a reason they can't have the same value and that way you never need to
break ABI just source code compatability.
Trev
>
>
> Right now I prefer a). The main problem with b) is that we would have
> three pairs of macros that would mean exactly the same. Of course, the
> main problem of a) is that we don't have right now a specific schedule
> for the API break so that means that we don't yet when the generic
> boundary would be added (FWIW, this is another candidate for our list of
> ATK3 bugs).
>
> BR
>
> --
> Alejandro Piñeiro Iglesias
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel
_______________________________________________
gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel
