QOF iteration and callbacks

Linas Vepstas linas at linas.org
Sun Jun 20 11:46:46 EDT 2004

On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 04:28:43PM +0100, Neil Williams was heard to remark:
> On Sunday 20 June 2004 4:12, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 04:49:37PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
> > > Neil Williams <linux at codehelp.co.uk> writes:
> > > > "one can then ask, at run time, what parameters are associated with a
> > > > given type, even if those parameters were not known at compile time."
> > > > src/doc/html/group__Class.html
> > >
> > > Yes, at this point there are no APIs to implement this.
> >
> > Whoops.  It is straightforward enough to add a 'for-each' function.
> > I'll see if I can do that right now.
> I've posted the code as it was this morning (see other message) and I can 
> explain why a GSList of parameter names is sufficient for me and, probably, 
> would be better than a foreach of the entire list for my needs.

Hmm. I've found that the foreach() style of programming is better
ifor many reasons, and want to support only that.  I was tickled to 
notice the other day that even the Linux kernel is migrating to 
a foreach style of coding.

It should be easy for you to take a foreach interface and build 
a gslist if that's what you want. 

> The original scenario involved just adding a single invoice - in that case, I 

I haven't yet read the back-emails. If you're working with invoices,
why would you need to know about all objects or all paramters?  
Don't you already ahve a clear idea of what an invoice is?


pub  1024D/01045933 2001-02-01 Linas Vepstas (Labas!) <linas at linas.org>
PGP Key fingerprint = 8305 2521 6000 0B5E 8984  3F54 64A9 9A82 0104 5933

More information about the gnucash-devel mailing list