Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 9:07 AM, Dan Winship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Another argument against this API is that presumably this would break if
>> the user did
>>
>> request = { width: 100, height: 50 };
>>
>> instead, which would be pretty non-obvious.
>
> I would think the above is obviously broken? It confuses a reference
> with a value, any competent programmer should get that...
> (there's no way to make the above work in JavaScript, afaik ... maybe
> I'm missing what you're saying)
Hm... well, I guess the confusion is that we're talking about having an
"out" or "inout" parameter which *isn't* pass-by-reference. I suppose if
you stop to think that Javascript doesn't have pass-by-reference then
that would be obvious, but presumably the corresponding methods in C++
and C# *would* use "GtkRequisition&" / "out Gtk.Requisition", and so
assigning to request like above in those languages *would* work. So
again, this is an argument for doing out params as return values like
now, rather than as sort-of-references.
-- Dan
_______________________________________________
language-bindings mailing list [email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/language-bindings
