On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:49:45PM +0100, Tim Janik wrote: > On Wed, 14 Dec 2005, Morten Welinder wrote: > > > > >>before starting to investigate in ugly hacks to continue maintaining the > >>current GTK_FLOATING semantics with GtkObject, i'd really like to raise > >>the issue that people/langauge bnindings most probably never should be > >>setting GTK_FLOATING with GTK_OBJECT_SET_FLAGS. besides the obvious > >>implementation, the only case i saw so far where this was need is > >>in GtkMenu. > > > >Gnumeric's use is in go_combo_popup_reparent which pretty much mirrors > >gtk_menu_reparent. > > > >Note, that GTK_OBJECT_SET_FLAGS is a macro. Fixing it will not help > >programs compiled against, say, gtk+ 2.6 headers. If the user updates > >gtk+, the application breaks, i.e., no ABI stability. > > yes, i'm fully aware of that, it was listed as possible impact > in the original thread: > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2005-September/msg00165.html
this thread never really addressed my concern, which was that this makes it so that container classes before 2.10 have one style, and >=2.10 have another. considering that this change is trying to simplify memory management, i'm dubious. as i origianlly mentioned, my example is g_value_set_object() which clearly should ref_sink(), but clearly cannot for abi compatiblity reasons (though i'm not exactly going to be shocked when a patch goes in that does it anyways...) - dave _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list