On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 18:57 +0300, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > On Sat, 2018-06-16 at 20:01 +0100, jnqnfe at gmail.com wrote: > > Is it intended that the mainloop API vtable be mutable, allowing > > users > > to hijack it with their own (proxy) methods, or should it and the > > 'get_api' functions really be constified? > > > > I held off on constifying this thus far (in both patching PA itself > > and > > in my Rust bindings) because I really wasn't sure what the > > intention > > was... > > > > With my latest work tidying things up in v2.x of the binding (just > > released), and with needing to now look to whether `Futures` is > > something to implement (with which I need to understand how future > > execution would couple with the mainloop), I really need to know > > this > > now... > > The vtable isn't meant to be mutable, but pa_mainloop_get_api() can't > be changed to return a const pointer, because that will break > applications that assign the result to a non-const variable. Only > function arguments can be constified, not function return values. Ok, right yes. I had to rush that email out and did not think that bit through. I've just sent in a load of patches relating to it in a separate email. I meant to reply to this previously but an update broke my mail client briefly :/ Thanks :)
