El mar, 30-08-2016 a las 08:54 +0200, Carlos Garcia Campos escribió:
> El lun, 29-08-2016 a las 10:01 -0700, Darin Adler escribió:
> >
> > >
> > > On Aug 29, 2016, at 1:16 AM, Carlos Garcia Campos > > t.
> > > org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Does that mean than from the WebIDL point
El mar, 30-08-2016 a las 19:00 +0200, Carlos Garcia Campos escribió:
[...]
> I just need some time, I'm very busy this week because I have to make
> a
> new branch for WebKitGTK+ 2.14 and prepare a new release. Good thing
> is
> that I made the branch today, so changes in trunk are less risky for
El mar, 30-08-2016 a las 09:52 -0700, Darin Adler escribió:
> Thanks for the frank discussion, guys.
>
> I do think we may be able to make the GObject bindings better and
> better over time even if they are hand written rather than generated.
Exactly.
> I understand that you want to keep them
Thanks for the frank discussion, guys.
I do think we may be able to make the GObject bindings better and better over
time even if they are hand written rather than generated. I understand that you
want to keep them vital and up to date in a way that the Apple folks are not
planning to do for
El mar, 30-08-2016 a las 06:10 -0500, Michael Catanzaro escribió:
> I'm OK with freezing the bindings. I'm disappointed in that these are
> a
> killer feature for us and they'll never get improved now, but
> generating them seems to be causing too many problems that we cannot
> easily solve.
why
I'm OK with freezing the bindings. I'm disappointed in that these are a
killer feature for us and they'll never get improved now, but
generating them seems to be causing too many problems that we cannot
easily solve.
On Tue, 2016-08-30 at 08:54 +0200, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote:
> haha, no, of
El lun, 29-08-2016 a las 10:01 -0700, Darin Adler escribió:
> > On Aug 29, 2016, at 1:16 AM, Carlos Garcia Campos > org> wrote:
> >
> > Does that mean than from the WebIDL point of view all methods can
> > now
> > raise a exception? If don't tell the code generator that a
> On Aug 29, 2016, at 1:16 AM, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote:
>
> Does that mean than from the WebIDL point of view all methods can now
> raise a exception? If don't tell the code generator that a method can
> raise a exception, we assume all could return a Exception?
Correct.
El lun, 29-08-2016 a las 07:54 -0500, Michael Catanzaro escribió:
> On Mon, 2016-08-29 at 14:45 +0200, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote:
> >
> > I agree this is not ideal for a GObject API, but I really don't see
> > how
> > this is a major problem, to be honest.
>
> The problem is that you would
On Mon, 2016-08-29 at 14:45 +0200, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote:
> I agree this is not ideal for a GObject API, but I really don't see
> how
> this is a major problem, to be honest.
The problem is that you would either have to check for errors on every
function call, including the 95% of function
El lun, 29-08-2016 a las 07:21 -0500, Michael Catanzaro escribió:
> On Mon, 2016-08-29 at 10:16 +0200, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote:
> >
> > We basically have a Exception member
> > in WebKitDOMObject base class that is reset for every method call,
> > and
> > set in case of exception. Then we add
On Mon, 2016-08-29 at 10:16 +0200, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote:
> We basically have a Exception member
> in WebKitDOMObject base class that is reset for every method call,
> and
> set in case of exception. Then we add
> webkit_dom_object_get_exception()
> to query if there were a exception. That's
El sáb, 27-08-2016 a las 23:12 -0700, Darin Adler escribió:
>
> Hi folks.
>
> You may have noticed the substantial improvements we’ve made to our
> WebIDL support over the last year.
>
> Also, the last few days I’ve been working on one small exciting
> improvement to our JavaScript bindings. We
Hi folks.
You may have noticed the substantial improvements we’ve made to our WebIDL
support over the last year.
Also, the last few days I’ve been working on one small exciting improvement to
our JavaScript bindings. We can express exceptions as a special return value
inside the DOM
14 matches
Mail list logo