Matthias Clasen wrote: > On 3/16/07, Marco Barisione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> BTW if you want I can split GRegex in two separate objects. >> > > Since that seems to be the overwhelming preference, "overwhelming"? > that might > be a good idea. I hope this shouldn't be too bad, since GRegex > is already split into pattern and match objects, internally. > Exactly, internally. Compare
return g_regex_match(re, "foobar", 0, 0); and Match *m; gboolean result; m = g_regex_match(re, "foobar", 0, 0); result = m != NULL; g_regex_match_free(m); return result; I do understand that a separate match object is a good idea. But "separate match object in C API is a good idea" is questionable. While thread-safety is important, it doesn't sound feasible a single GRegex object will be used from different threads to match something in *many* cases. Maybe it makes sense to add thread safety in some other way? The single-object version is certainly more convenient than a version with a separate match object. By the way, I don't know about Java, but having re.match() return an object is very often gets in your way in Python (for different reasons but it does say something about "it's done so in Python"). Best regards, Yevgen _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
