Re: About gsettings aborting on unkown schemas

[Christian Dywan <christian lanedo com>]

Am Mon, 30 May 2011 21:13:16 -0400 schrieb Havoc Pennington:

> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Shaun McCance <shaunm gnome org>
> wrote:
> > But I want to point out that my point was never that GLib
> > should behave like a language with exceptions. Just that
> > it should let bindings in those languages behave like they
> > should.
> 
> I agree that would be ideal if you were optimizing for non-C.
> 
> But the only way to do that is to replicate the entire API currently
> lacking an error indicator, with a second _with_error version of every
> function.
> 
> Some functions may happen to have some other ad hoc way to do an error
> (like returning NULL) but it'd just be some subset without rhyme or
> reason.
> 
> If you aren't prepared to do the _with_error() replication of the API,
> then doing it here and there at random is kinda weird. Either it's
> needed or not, it isn't needed here and there at random.

This is a great argument. There was a mistake. It made you notice the API is inconsistent, so you suddenly insist that GLib can't be improved further without rewriting all the functions....

I would personally prefer it if you were honest and would say that your opinion is set, instead of giving bogus arguments. Including the one about g_error. Then nobody would continue wasting time on trying to explain his point of view to deaf ears.

-- 
ciao,
    Christian