> -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/efl] master 02/02: ecore: force > initialization of Efl.Io.Closer.Fd. > Local Time: September 25, 2017 8:01 PM > UTC Time: September 26, 2017 3:01 AM > From: [email protected] > To: Enlightenment developer list <[email protected]> > > 2017-09-26 8:21 GMT+09:00 Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri <[email protected]>: > >> then we should have an equivalent of a constructor for a mixin? as you >> said, eventually "initialize to 0" is not good enough >> >> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 7:11 PM, Cedric Bail <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> >> Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/efl] master 02/02: ecore: force >> initialization of Efl.Io.Closer.Fd. >> >> Local Time: September 23, 2017 11:39 AM >> >> UTC Time: September 23, 2017 6:39 PM >> >> From: [email protected] >> >> To: Enlightenment developer list <enlightenment-devel@lists. >> sourceforge.net> >> >> >> >> This is not right. You can use only -1 and you can use the constructor. >> > >> > It is a mixin that doesn"t inherit from Efl.Object, so I can"t see a way >> to use the constructor there. The problem of the initialization being 0, >> means that you end up with the possibility that a non initialized object >> will close fd 0 at fork time without owning that fd at all. >> > > Just inherit from Efl.Object as an interface (ie. not the 1st class). There > is Efl.Interface if you need to inherit from a dummy interface. > Constructors work fine with mixins.
Nice trick, I didn't know about that one. Pushed with it and it is obviously much better this way. Cedric ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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 [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
