cookie to jdub

a name i was thinking about a long time ago and jeff reminded me of

i present to the world:

GVariant

if anyone has anything negative to say about this name, now would be a good time…

8 Comments

  1. Posted January 2, 2008 at 5:51 am | Permalink

    Variant would be the correct term in D-Bus (a container that packs the type along with the value) and since GVariants are tied to the D-Bus type system it makes sense.

  2. Xav
    Posted January 2, 2008 at 11:15 am | Permalink

    Err .. it seems to me it’s an INvariant thing ? Or I missed something.
    Plus, you fixed a limit at G+5 chars, remember :)

  3. Tim Müller
    Posted January 2, 2008 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

    Doesn’t seem particularly intuitive to me at all, but maybe I’m missing something. Could you explain how it fits the bill?

    There was a good handful of suggestions that actually make sense (to me, at least) in your last post. Oh, and while we’re at it and you did away with the G+5 requirement: GWireValue or GWireVal ;)

  4. Posted January 2, 2008 at 1:38 pm | Permalink

    Mmm… “Variant”… just like in Visual Basic!
    :)

  5. Posted January 2, 2008 at 4:07 pm | Permalink

    I’d love if it’d make the connection to D-Bus and serializing more obvious – those are the 2 primary rasons for its existance after all. But as I have no idea how to put that into 5 letters, I’ll just shut up.

  6. slougi
    Posted January 3, 2008 at 1:13 pm | Permalink

    This sounds similar to Qt’s QVariant: http://doc.trolltech.com/4.3/qvariant.html

  7. Posted January 3, 2008 at 6:03 pm | Permalink

    Dan: You see right through to the core of me. ;-)

  8. ac
    Posted January 22, 2008 at 11:50 am | Permalink

    Are you going to release gsettings and dconf sometime? Like before 2009?