Hi, This is now well documented ( https://www.enlightenment.org/develop/tutorials/c/eo-refcount.md) but the more I use efl_add the more I feel it is confusing especially to new developers.
In the current model (if I understand it correctly) 1) child = efl_add(klass, parent) means the child must NOT be unfeferenced 2) child = efl_add(klass, NULL) means the child should be unreferenced 3) child = efl_add_ref(klass, parent) means the child must be unreferenced 4) child = efl_add_ref(klass, NULL) somehow means that the child should be unreferenced twice In my opinion 1) and 4) are peculiar and so I provide a proposal to fix this: We could change efl_add to return void. It never retains a reference. If the parent is NULL then it should be automatically unref before returning. Then efl_add_ref would be changed to mirror this and always retain exactly 1 reference - so if parent is NULL there is no double count returned. Using this model if an Eo * is returned then I know I have a reference and must later unref. Any need for using the pointer in an efl_add (which is no longer returned) would still be supported through efl_added within the constructor. What do people think about this? I put the suggestion forward to improve the symettry with add and unref which is currently confusing. If my assumptions above are incorrect please let me know! Thanks, Andy -- http://andywilliams.me http://ajwillia.ms ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
