Tim Janik wrote: [..] >> Would that be enough? > > why? what is the type specification good for if it's not an object? > and, didn't an earlier variant of your code match object="button" > to some "button" object from the builder file? so then, the straight > forward mapping of the GSignal API would be: > <signal name="signalname" handler="callbackname" // mandatory > after="bool" // optional > swapped="bool" // optional > user_data="0x42" object="objectname" // optionally have either of > these but not both > /> > > i'd say anything other than > "after" indicating G_CONNECT_AFTER, > "swapped" indicating G_CONNECT_SWAPPED, > "object" indicating g_signal_connect_object, > would be misleading and likely confuse people > who also know the C API. > especially so, since g_object_connect() already establishes > a mapping between strings and AFTER/SWAPPED/connect_object, > which is exactly the one i listed above.
I also realized that after trying to implement user_type/user_data and I agree that haveing after, swapped and object tags is a much better mapping to what you can do using signal connection mechanism. The only use case it doesn't cover is a way to send in a string or an integer (with GPOINTER_TO_INT), as Morten mentioned in this thread. Johan _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list