On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 15:01 +0200, Frederik wrote:
> Jürg Billeter wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 12:09 +0200, Frederik wrote:
> >> I think in the GIO vapi bindings there are more parameters that should
> >> be marked as nullable. For example: "etag" as in File.replace() or
> >> "progress_callbac
On Tue, 20 May 2008 16:12:03 +0100
Sam Liddicott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think it may be simpler to allow the null-able clue to be part of the
> C source using a macro indicator which can be compiled away in C.
>
> #ifndef VALA
> #define NULL_OK
> #endif
>
> send_to_mainloop_async (GLib.S
12
Cc: vala-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Vala] [PATCH] GIO nullable parameters
* Frederik wrote, On 20/05/08 14:01:
> Jürg Billeter wrote:
>> On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 12:09 +0200, Frederik wrote:
>>> I think in the GIO vapi bindings there are more parameters that should
>>> be ma
* Frederik wrote, On 20/05/08 14:01:
> Jürg Billeter wrote:
>> On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 12:09 +0200, Frederik wrote:
>>> I think in the GIO vapi bindings there are more parameters that should
>>> be marked as nullable. For example: "etag" as in File.replace() or
>>> "progress_callback" as in File.move
Jürg Billeter wrote:
On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 12:09 +0200, Frederik wrote:
I think in the GIO vapi bindings there are more parameters that should
be marked as nullable. For example: "etag" as in File.replace() or
"progress_callback" as in File.move().
Yes, we certainly still miss a lot of nullabl
