Am 18.12.2009 22:48, schrieb Nicola Fontana: > Il giorno Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:14:53 +0200 > Stefan Kost <enso...@hora-obscura.de> ha scritto: > >> Am 18.12.2009 15:58, schrieb Nicola Fontana: >>> I think the problem is the link to a struct that is subclassing a >>> GObject is renamed to MyStructName+"_struct" [1] (resulting in >>> MyStructName-struct after the id mangling). I suppose this is done >>> to differentiate the link to the section from the link to the >>> struct in the same GObject page, a quite common situation in GTK+. >> >> Uhm, this is nasty. I did not thought about this. That should then be >> taken into account by gtk-doc as this "-struct" suffix is a internal >> detail and when linking to class memebers that is the desired >> outcome. Please anyone file another bug for that. > > Hi Stefan, > > how do you intend to differentiate between a link to a section and a > link to the struct? I mean, #GtkWidget will refer to > GtkWidget.html#GtkWidget or to GtkWidget.html#GtkWidget-struct? > I think letting the users choose the better one is a good thing. Maybe > the syntax could be improved but I don't consider this a bug. > > Ciao.
This is one of the flaws in the historic (non-)design. I have not thought about it. My current thinking is to make - #GtkWidget -> Section docs - #GtkWidget-struct -> object instance struct docs - #GtkWidget.member -> object instance struct-member docs - ... So in fixxref we could try to smuggle the "-struct" in when the #GtkWidget.member link can otherwise not be resolved. How does that sound? I'd like to avoid that people would need to write #GtkWidget-struct.member. Stefan _______________________________________________ gtk-doc-list mailing list gtk-doc-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-doc-list