[03:43] <mhall119> jvrbanac: I was wondering where the method docs were being stores, I wonder why it's in retval
[03:44] <mhall119> I suppose we need to figure out how to parse and linkify these gir doc strings
[03:44] <mhall119> looking pretty good so far though
[03:46] <jvrbanac> Yeah. I don't know. I noticed that they were getting stored in the db. So I went searching for where they were getting stored in the model
[03:47] <jvrbanac> pdb to the rescue :D
[03:49] <mhall119> heh, yeah, probably something funky about the GIR file spec
[03:50] <mhall119> anyway, I pushed another revision for some added styling, plus breaking the methods table up based on defining class
[03:51] <jvrbanac> That is much better! My eyes thank you!
[03:54] <jvrbanac> Btw, was there a reason you set that template conditional to the string of "None"
[03:56] <mhall119> yeah, some are hidden if I make it a string, others are hidden if it's the literal None, I'm not entirely sure why just yet
[03:56] <mhall119> I suspect some of them actually have a value of "None"
[03:57] <jvrbanac> weird. I didn't noticed that, ok.
[03:57] <mhall119> anyway, almost midnight here, I'll chat with you tomorrow
[03:58] <jvrbanac> Yep. Have a good one!
[19:58] <mhall119> jvrbanac: gah, these Type records are gonna make everything difficult, they have no direct link to any Node records
[20:00] <jvrbanac> mhall119, You know, I was looking at that the whole model structure and it seemed like it could be cleaned up and simplified a bit.
[20:01] <jvrbanac> It could be because I'm pretty new to that code, but it seemed like it was more complicated then it needed to be
[20:30] <mhall119> jvrbanac: I think that's how C/GObject do things that is making it overly complicated
[20:50] <jvrbanac> mhall119, yeah, oh well. So is there a reason why Type records don't have a direct link to the Nodes?  It would seem important to link the two at some point. That way you could easily correlate the return types.
[20:50] <mhall119> jvrbanac: I think it's because of the way C works
[20:50] <jvrbanac> lol ok
[20:51] <mhall119> a Node has a Namespace, which has a version
[20:51] <mhall119> so, PreviewAction is in Unity namespace, version 6.0
[20:52] <mhall119> but C doesn't really care where the Type is, so it says it's a PreviewAction type, and then it's up to the runtime to decice that PreviewAction is
[20:52] <jvrbanac> got it
[20:52] <mhall119> could be PreviewAction in Unity 5, could be PreviewAction in Unity 6
[20:52] <mhall119> heck, it could be PreviewAction in FakeUnityLibrary 10.0
[20:53] <mhall119> so, future work is going to need to have smarter lookups than I have in there now
[20:53] <mhall119> we'll need say "Find PreviewAction in the Ubuntu 12.04 platform definition"
[20:53] <mhall119> and from there know to use Unity 5, not Unity 6
[20:54] <mhall119> as verbose and tedious as Java is to write, it cerainly made tooling easy
[20:55] <jvrbanac> true
[20:56] <jvrbanac> Brb... moving to a different meeting room :)