Skip to content

Conversation

@iK4tsu
Copy link

@iK4tsu iK4tsu commented Jun 17, 2020

Signed-off-by: João Lourenço jlourenco5691@gmail.com

Signed-off-by: João Lourenço <jlourenco5691@gmail.com>
@ljmf00
Copy link

ljmf00 commented Jun 18, 2020

I would say it's better to put the function inside this file, here: https://github.com/gtkd-developers/GtkD/blob/master/src/APILookupGtk.txt#L2007

by adding:

noCode: format_secondary_text
noCode: format_secondary_markup

and the actual code inside this scope:

code: start
// ...
code: end

Anyway, I don't see any of these as a good approach since it should be generated from the bindings. Could you give a hint here @MikeWey ?

@MikeWey
Copy link
Member

MikeWey commented Jun 18, 2020

Adding them via the Lookup files is indeed better, since than the additions will survive when regenerating the binding.

The aren't generated because we currently don't have a good way to get the variatic parameter across the binding without human intervention. Although dlangs meta programming may have improved enough to get it working.

@iK4tsu
Copy link
Author

iK4tsu commented Jun 18, 2020

Sorry I'm new to this project. I noticed those files before making the PR, but found it strange when some functions were missing, setMarkup and the deprecated getImage and setImage. Because of that I decided to add them directly on the class itself. Maybe I should've just made an issue instead. Since the PR I've been trying to figure out how to generate those bindings with the Lookup file, unsuccessfully.

Should I amend my PR and add these changes in the Lookup file? And how can I test it?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

3 participants