Hello,
I also don't like the idea of having completely separated plugin
versions, one for GTK2 and one for GTK3.
But I also do not like to have my code littered with #ifdef's.
I am not sure if we can simply handle all things with some macro's in a
header.
What about writing some compatibility code for the plugins in the common
utils lib?
So plugins can share the compatibility code and the #ifdef's would only
be in the common utils lib.
It might mean an extra function call but IMHO that is acceptable.
Regards,
Lars
On 24.02.2018 03:53, Matthew Brush wrote:
On 2018-02-23 11:53 AM, Lars Paulsen wrote:
Hello All,
I have ported the scope plugin to GTK3.
During that work I also noticed some deprecation warnings for the
workbench plugin which I did create not long ago
and as suggested by the HACKING file I did write it for GTK2.
If I port a plugin to GTK3 should it still support GTK2?
Should we change the HACKING file regarding the preferred GTK version
to prevent people from writing new plugins based on GTK2?
Hi,
For the average plugin with minimal dependencies I would recommend to
support both since it's so easy. You can put all of your version
specific stuff into a single compatibility header (and/or re-use
Geany's) so you don't need to litter your code with #ifdef stuff very
much.
Most distros, as well as the Windows and MacOS releases are still
shipping the GTK+2 version of Geany/Geany-Plugins and it's the build
system default as well, so if you care about supporting a wide user
base, supporting both versions is a good idea.
Regards,
Matthew Brush
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.geany.org
https://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.geany.org
https://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
