Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-12-10 at 19:44 -0500, José Alburquerque wrote:
>
>> Murray Cumming wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 2007-12-09 at 00:58 -0500, José Alburquerque wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I was thinking of changing the "_CLASS_OPAQUE_REFCOUNTED(Message,
>>>> GstMessage, NONE, gst_message_ref, gst_message_unref)" line in
>>>> message.hg to something like "_CLASS_GOBJECT(Message, GstMessage,
>>>> GST_MESSAGE, Gst::MiniObject, GstMiniObject)". Is this a good
>>>> approach?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> GstMiniObject doesn't derived from GObject, right? So I don't think it
>>> would be a good idea to use _CLASS_GOBJECT().
>>>
>>> I'm afraid that we might need a new macro, but you might try using
>>> _CLASS_GENERIC() to see how far that gets us.
>>>
>>> I will take care of this if it does turn out to be difficult.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I was thinking of writing similar "wrapping" functionality for
>> Gst::MiniObject as in Glib::ObjectBase/Glib::Object. I thought of
>> taking wrap.{h,c} from glibmm and "modifying" them to work for
>> Gst::MiniObject/GstMiniObject and then modifying Gst::MiniObject to
>> include the "wrapper" functionality of Glib::ObjectBase and
>> Glib::Object. I'm wondering if this would be worthwhile at this time.
>> Would it be?
>>
>
> I guess I'll take a look at this.
>
>
If you feel like it. :-) I've looked a bit and started to make some
modifications, but if you'll look into it you'll probably have a better
sense as to what has to be done. Would you like me to send you the
modifications I've made so far?
> We won't be able to duplicate Glib::wrap() as it works for Glib::Object
> because GstMiniObject lacks things from GObject that it needs, such as
> object data and notification of destruction. But we should be able to do
> something simpler that will be enough for us.
>
>
Absolutely.
-Jose
_______________________________________________
gtkmm-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
