Ping?

[Dave Peticolas]

Robert Graham Merkel writes:
> (now cc'ing to -devel because technical)
> Dave Peticolas writes:
>  > Robert Graham Merkel writes:
> <snip>
>  > > After that, I'll also build a combination widget that
>  > > supports both absolute and relative dates.
>  > 
>  > Sounds good.
> 
> Actually, I've realised I've gone about things the wrong way.  Instead
> of making another "relative-date" option type, I think I should modify
> the existing date option to provide the choice of either absolute
> dates, relative dates, or both.  Grrrrr. . . but most of the code I
> wrote was necessary anyway.  What do you think?

I think that's a good idea.


> Secondly, the option-data field of the options data structure seems to
> assume that is a list of vectors with certain fields containing
> certain data, but I don't think it's documented anywhere.
> Additionally, there is C code which directly manipulates this option
> data structure.
> 
> Instead of that, do you think it might be a good idea to add some more
> getters to the option data structure to extract the relevant
> information from the option-data field?   This would have the
> following benefits:
> 
> 1)	  It would allow the option-data field to be structured more
> flexibility.  
> 2)     It would ensure guile data structures are manipulated from
> guile, not C, where it's considerably more work.

Yup, I agree. The 'option-data' field is intended to be used as
needed for particular options, some of which need more data than
others. Using guile getters for the extra data would be good.

dave