>the point is, you only have to adapt your code if fancy_container_add()
>changes, and that can occour regardless of libgobject changes.
>
>the only relation existing here is:
> fancy_container_add() cannot sink GObjects as long as libgobject does not
> support floating objects.
>
>and we'r abo
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, ANDREW PAPROCKI, BLOOMBERG/ 731 LEXIN wrote:
Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
New code:
object = fancy_not_gtk_object_new();
g_object_ref_sink(object); /* because I don't know what will container do */
fancy_container_add(container, object);
g_object_unref(object);
What I want the
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
I apologize for junk-posting, I'll learn to use mozilla next time.
Tim Janik wrote:
it's language bindings and container implementations that do this.
the floating flag is actually meant to make it easier on the user as
outlined in:
Let me expand m
ANDREW PAPROCKI, BLOOMBERG/ 731 LEXIN wrote:
What I want the container code to do is assert if an object is not floating, and
ref_sink internally. So the user's code will look like:
object = fancy_not_gtk_object_new();
fancy_container_add(container, object);
Exactly! Code of *your* users wi
Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
>New code:
>
>object = fancy_not_gtk_object_new();
>g_object_ref_sink(object); /* because I don't know what will container do */
>fancy_container_add(container, object);
>g_object_unref(object);
What I want the container code to do is assert if an object is not floating, and
I apologize for junk-posting, I'll learn to use mozilla next time.
Tim Janik wrote:
it's language bindings and container implementations that do this.
the floating flag is actually meant to make it easier on the user as
outlined in:
Let me expand my code samples:
Old code:
object = fancy_no
Tim Janik wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
ANDREW PAPROCKI, BLOOMBERG/ 731 LEXIN wrote:
When you are calling your own code, it is not that much to keep
track of, but when I write code that is used by 1000 developers it
is much easier for me to take care of the reference iss
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
ANDREW PAPROCKI, BLOOMBERG/ 731 LEXIN wrote:
When you are calling your own code, it is not that much to keep track of,
but when I write code that is used by 1000 developers it is much easier for
me to take care of the reference issues inside the API
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005, Dave Benson wrote:
people who want floating flags could always derive from GtkObject if they
don't want to reimplement it...
this is not an option for glib-only programs.
- dave
---
ciaoTJ
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:33:52AM -0600, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
> ANDREW PAPROCKI, BLOOMBERG/ 731 LEXIN wrote:
>
> >When you are calling your own code, it is not that
> >much to keep track of, but when I write code that is used by 1000
> >developers it is much easier for me to take care of the r
ANDREW PAPROCKI, BLOOMBERG/ 731 LEXIN wrote:
When you are calling your own code, it is not that
much to keep track of, but when I write code that is used by 1000 developers it
is much easier for me to take care of the reference issues inside the API and
make the large group of unknown develope
Yes, we do really need the floating reference. There is no reason to discourage
the code you mentioned when you want to make reusable container objects that
have a sane API without requiring the caller to do a bunch of work and
potentially introduce bugs. When you are calling your own code, it i
12 matches
Mail list logo
