On 21/08/15 18:33, Cedric BAIL wrote: > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Tom Hacohen <t...@stosb.com> wrote: >> tasn pushed a commit to branch master. >> >> http://git.enlightenment.org/core/efl.git/commit/?id=93ade6f4ce4a336dfcdc748a09dd35003591978b >> >> commit 93ade6f4ce4a336dfcdc748a09dd35003591978b >> Author: Tom Hacohen <t...@stosb.com> >> Date: Fri Aug 21 17:19:47 2015 +0100 >> >> Eo base: clean up parent removal in destructor. >> >> This cleans up the changes in 8689d54471aafdd7a5b5a27ce116bf2ab68c1042. >> This commit reduces code duplication, and fixes broken handling of >> overridden parent_set(). > > Seriously that look as much hacky as the previous one. The issue is > still here. Why does eo_del remove the parent, but not eo_unref ? What > is the semantic of eo_del in fact here ? Reading the code, it just > means detach from parent and unref. While unref means unref without > unlinking... which could result in dead reference. > > If eo_unref was removing the parent properly at the right time all the > patch that went in that part of eo could just be removed in my > opinion.
We are already discussing the details on the other thread. This patch is just here to fix the wrong implementation that was there. As I said in the other thread, I also think this should be dropped, again, as said in the other thread. If after reading that thread you still have more questions, please raise them there and I'll happily answer/comment. -- Tom. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
