| Summary: | WockyNodeTree and friends | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Wocky | Reporter: | Will Thompson <will> |
| Component: | General | Assignee: | Will Thompson <will> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | Telepathy bugs list <telepathy-bugs> |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | medium | Keywords: | patch |
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | Other | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| URL: | http://git.collabora.co.uk/?p=user/sjoerd/wocky.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/wockynodetree | ||
| Whiteboard: | review+ | ||
| i915 platform: | i915 features: | ||
|
Description
Will Thompson
2010-04-19 09:39:33 UTC
+
+/* Slightly evil macro that tests that two stanzas are equal without regarding
+ * their id, except that if one has an id and the other does not this is not
+ * considered a difference. It modifies the stanzas because I am lazy.
*/
-#define test_assert_stanzas_equal(s1, s2) \
+#define test_assert_stanzas_equal_no_id(s1, s2) \
The change here is adding "without regarding their id", and that's not true. The bit after the comma explains exactly how IDs are treated. So I don't think this improves the comment.
+wocky_xmpp_node_new (const char *name, const gchar *ns)
{
WockyXmppNode *result = g_slice_new0 (WockyXmppNode);
result->name = g_strdup (name);
+ result->ns = (ns != NULL) ? g_quark_from_string (ns) : 0;
g_quark_from_string() is NULL-safe.
@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+/*
+ * wocky-node-tree.c - Source for WockyNodeTree
+ * Copyright (C) 2006 Collabora Ltd.
+ * wocky-node-tree.h - Header for WockyNodeTree
+ * Copyright (C) 2006,2010 Collabora Ltd.
I find that very hard to believe.
6af7e30332 adds:
+WockyNodeTree *wocky_node_tree_build (WockyNodeBuildTag first_tag,
+ ...) G_GNUC_NULL_TERMINATED;
+
+WockyNodeTree * wocky_node_tree_build_va (va_list ap);
+
but they're not implemented anywhere afaict.
+void
+wocky_xmpp_node_add_build (WockyXmppNode *node,
+ WockyNodeBuildTag first_tag,
+ ...)
+{
+ va_list ap;
+
+ va_start (ap, first_tag);
+ wocky_xmpp_node_add_build_va (node, ap);
+ va_end (ap);
+}
Doesn't this mean you're not passing first_tag to _build_va?
+/**
+ * wocky_node_add_build:
+ * @node: The node under which to add a new subtree
+ * @first_tag: The build tag for the first node
+ * @Varargs: the description of the stanza to build,
+ * terminated with %NULL
+ *
+ * Add a node subtree to an existing parent node
There should be a full stop at the end of this sentence.
+ * Example:
+ * <example><programlisting>
+ * wocky_node_add_build (node,
+ * '(', "body",
+ * '$', "Telepathy rocks!",
+ * ')',
+ * NULL);
+ * </programlisting></example>
+ *
+ * <!-- -->* adds the following under the given node
+ * <body>
+ * Telepathy rocks!
+ * </body>
+ * *<!-- -->/
+ * </programlisting></example>
+ *
+ */
You close the <programlisting> and <example> twice. You can use |[ ... ]| as an abbreviation. I think the listing should end at the end of the C code, and the XML could be in its own block. <programlisting language="xml"> ?
(In reply to comment #1) > +void > +wocky_xmpp_node_add_build (WockyXmppNode *node, > + WockyNodeBuildTag first_tag, > + ...) > +{ > + va_list ap; > + > + va_start (ap, first_tag); > + wocky_xmpp_node_add_build_va (node, ap); > + va_end (ap); > +} > > > Doesn't this mean you're not passing first_tag to _build_va? It should have a smoke-test either way. > + * <!-- -->* adds the following under the given node > + * <body> > + * Telepathy rocks! > + * </body> > + * *<!-- -->/ > + * </programlisting></example> > + * > + */ > > You close the <programlisting> and <example> twice. You can use |[ ... ]| as an > abbreviation. I think the listing should end at the end of the C code, and the > XML could be in its own block. <programlisting language="xml"> ? (In reply to comment #1) > + > +/* Slightly evil macro that tests that two stanzas are equal without regarding > + * their id, except that if one has an id and the other does not this is not > + * considered a difference. It modifies the stanzas because I am lazy. > */ > -#define test_assert_stanzas_equal(s1, s2) \ > +#define test_assert_stanzas_equal_no_id(s1, s2) \ > > The change here is adding "without regarding their id", and that's not true. > The bit after the comma explains exactly how IDs are treated. So I don't think > this improves the comment. revert that change, the function confused me more then i thought :) > +wocky_xmpp_node_new (const char *name, const gchar *ns) > { > WockyXmppNode *result = g_slice_new0 (WockyXmppNode); > > result->name = g_strdup (name); > + result->ns = (ns != NULL) ? g_quark_from_string (ns) : 0; > > g_quark_from_string() is NULL-safe. fixed > @@ -0,0 +1,85 @@ > +/* > + * wocky-node-tree.c - Source for WockyNodeTree > + * Copyright (C) 2006 Collabora Ltd. > > + * wocky-node-tree.h - Header for WockyNodeTree > + * Copyright (C) 2006,2010 Collabora Ltd. > > I find that very hard to believe. dates updated to be ranges > 6af7e30332 adds: > > +WockyNodeTree *wocky_node_tree_build (WockyNodeBuildTag first_tag, > + ...) G_GNUC_NULL_TERMINATED; > + > +WockyNodeTree * wocky_node_tree_build_va (va_list ap); > + > > but they're not implemented anywhere afaict. yup nuked them > +void > +wocky_xmpp_node_add_build (WockyXmppNode *node, > + WockyNodeBuildTag first_tag, > + ...) > +{ > + va_list ap; > + > + va_start (ap, first_tag); > + wocky_xmpp_node_add_build_va (node, ap); > + va_end (ap); > +} > > > Doesn't this mean you're not passing first_tag to _build_va? yeah it's broken, fixed and test added > +/** > + * wocky_node_add_build: > + * @node: The node under which to add a new subtree > + * @first_tag: The build tag for the first node > + * @Varargs: the description of the stanza to build, > + * terminated with %NULL > + * > + * Add a node subtree to an existing parent node > > There should be a full stop at the end of this sentence. . added > + * Example: > + * <example><programlisting> > + * wocky_node_add_build (node, > + * '(', "body", > + * '$', "Telepathy rocks!", > + * ')', > + * NULL); > + * </programlisting></example> > + * > + * <!-- -->* adds the following under the given node > + * <body> > + * Telepathy rocks! > + * </body> > + * *<!-- -->/ > + * </programlisting></example> > + * > + */ > > You close the <programlisting> and <example> twice. You can use |[ ... ]| as an > abbreviation. I think the listing should end at the end of the C code, and the > XML could be in its own block. <programlisting language="xml"> ? slightly tweaked, also tweaked the doc generation as this didn't even end up there full speed ahead |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.