(In reply to alexander :surkov from comment #16)
> > 2) We never call atk_object_set_*(), we use object->xxx = blahblahblah, in
> > our code.
>
> API said that object->xxx shouldn't be public (atk_object->accessible).
>
I don't think setting object->xxx in getXXXCB is using it as public.
> > However, IMHO,
> > atk_object_set_name should just use accessible->name.
>
> It doesn't sound like it's worth to cache accessible name since we always
> calculate the name on demand (also it's extra strings copy). In gecko we
> don't fire name_change event for every changed name. So we get hard times to
> update accessible->name. It sounds all we can do what we do now when we were
> asked for a name then update accessible->name.
>
> So I think we should go with 1)
I don't think we should cache it, but I think we should keep accessible->name updated.
We need to copy the string to gchar* anyway.
(In reply to alexander :surkov from comment #16) >accessible) .
> > 2) We never call atk_object_set_*(), we use object->xxx = blahblahblah, in
> > our code.
>
> API said that object->xxx shouldn't be public (atk_object-
>
I don't think setting object->xxx in getXXXCB is using it as public.
> > However, IMHO,
> > atk_object_set_name should just use accessible->name.
>
> It doesn't sound like it's worth to cache accessible name since we always
> calculate the name on demand (also it's extra strings copy). In gecko we
> don't fire name_change event for every changed name. So we get hard times to
> update accessible->name. It sounds all we can do what we do now when we were
> asked for a name then update accessible->name.
>
> So I think we should go with 1)
I don't think we should cache it, but I think we should keep accessible->name updated.
We need to copy the string to gchar* anyway.