On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 08:24:13 +1100 Lex Trotman elextr@gmail.com wrote:
, but I don't really think we should add accessors for
all fields.
@Nick,
Well you have in the past commented negatively about making structures visible. As you sagely said either you constrain your implementation or yuo have to spend the effort "faking" the structure for plugin purposes.
It depends on what fields we're talking about. For a getter function for a pref, there's not much you can do if the behaviour of the pref changes or the pref is removed, the function will be no better than the field.
Getting groups of prefs is different. One solution for overridden prefs is editor_get_indent_prefs(): http://www.geany.org/manual/reference/editor_8h.html#db89e1ea679531fb35ba13e...
Perhaps this would be a good approach for other pref groups.
Fields in the API generally should not be set. There is a stronger argument for adding setter functions than getter functions, if plugins need to set something.
I'm not saying any of this needs to happen yesterday, but if we don't start thinking about it nothing will ever happen. And as more plugins are being made, adding significant capability to Geany the problems of updating them in sync will get worse.
Nick