Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add GType registration for SugarEventController and SugarSwipeController states #479

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

MostlyKIGuess
Copy link
Member

Content:

  • This Pull Request adds GType registration for the SugarEventController and SugarSwipeController states. This ensures that the enums are properly registered with the GObject type system, resolving the undeclared identifier errors.

Changes:

  • Added sugar_event_controller_state_get_type function to register SugarEventControllerState enum.
  • Added sugar_swipe_direction_get_type and sugar_swipe_direction_flags_get_type functions to register SugarSwipeDirection and SugarSwipeDirectionFlags enums.
  • Updated sugar-key-grabber.c to include the generated sugar-marshal.h and replaced deprecated functions.

Fixes:

  • Make erros that occured.

@MostlyKIGuess
Copy link
Member Author

error logs:

sugar-event-controller.c: In function 'sugar_event_controller_class_init': sugar-event-controller.c:123:55: error: 'SUGAR_TYPE_EVENT_CONTROLLER_STATE' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 'SUGAR_TYPE_EVENT_CONTROLLER'? 123 | SUGAR_TYPE_EVENT_CONTROLLER_STATE, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | SUGAR_TYPE_EVENT_CONTROLLER sugar-event-controller.c:123:55: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
sugar-swipe-controller.c: In function 'sugar_swipe_controller_class_init': sugar-swipe-controller.c:374:56: error: 'SUGAR_TYPE_SWIPE_DIRECTION_FLAGS' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 'SUGAR_SWIPE_DIRECTION_FLAG_UP'? 374 | SUGAR_TYPE_SWIPE_DIRECTION_FLAGS, 0, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | SUGAR_SWIPE_DIRECTION_FLAG_UP sugar-swipe-controller.c:374:56: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in sugar-swipe-controller.c:386:19: error: 'SUGAR_TYPE_SWIPE_DIRECTION' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 'SUGAR_SWIPE_DIRECTION_UP'? 386 | SUGAR_TYPE_SWIPE_DIRECTION); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | SUGAR_SWIPE_DIRECTION_UP

@chimosky
Copy link
Member

You commit message can be better written to contain some of the things you've written in your opening comment, also include the make errors.

@MostlyKIGuess
Copy link
Member Author

You commit message can be better written to contain some of the things you've written in your opening comment, also include the make errors.

So 2 commits with respective title , then on description I will add the reason and the make error.?

@quozl
Copy link
Contributor

quozl commented Jan 20, 2025

I agree, commit message should be better, but not willing to rewrite it myself otherwise I'd squash. You do read existing commits I hope?

I note the documentation build check is failing.

- Added sugar_event_controller_state_get_type to register SugarEventControllerState enum.
- Fixes compilation error related to undeclared SUGAR_TYPE_EVENT_CONTROLLER_STATE in sugar-event-controller.c.
- Added sugar_swipe_direction_get_type and sugar_swipe_direction_flags_get_type to register SugarSwipeDirection and SugarSwipeDirectionFlags enums.
- Fixes compilation errors related to undeclared SUGAR_TYPE_SWIPE_DIRECTION_FLAGS and SUGAR_TYPE_SWIPE_DIRECTION in sugar-swipe-controller.c.
@MostlyKIGuess
Copy link
Member Author

I agree, commit message should be better, but not willing to rewrite it myself otherwise I'd squash. You do read existing commits I hope?

I note the documentation build check is failing.

Are the current commits better? I am not sure what to change here so..

  • The documentation has been failing for quite a long time.

@MostlyKIGuess MostlyKIGuess marked this pull request as draft January 20, 2025 10:42
@quozl
Copy link
Contributor

quozl commented Jan 22, 2025

Yes, the documentation build for this pull request is still failing; does GitHub not show this in an all checks have failed window above the comment entry box? If not, it may be an access problem. @chimosky what do you see?

Edit: followup mail notification shows other pull requests without reference to this one, so please remember to link them up next time.

#481

@MostlyKIGuess
Copy link
Member Author

Yes, the documentation build for this pull request is still failing; does GitHub not show this in an all checks have failed window above the comment entry box? If not, it may be an access problem. @chimosky what do you see?

Edit: followup mail notification shows other pull requests without reference to this one, so please remember to link them up next time.

#481

Oh yeah I will convert that to draft as well , we discussed this on matrix no soln found as of now.

@MostlyKIGuess
Copy link
Member Author

not needed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants