[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gtk-devel
Subject:    Re: Pluggable widget types and implementations
From:       Tristan Van Berkom <tvb () gnome ! org>
Date:       2006-12-08 17:14:23
Message-ID: 1165598063.23463.94.camel () thug
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 17:49 +0100, Tim Janik wrote:
[...]
> > This abstraction would ensure that there is no confusion at the GType
> > level, if we start substituting types at the GType level then types
> > will inevidably be substituted underneath unsuspecting code, that
> > doesnt sound safe to me at all,
> 
> we will not do that. never ever. i've adressed that in another
> email already:
>    http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2006-November/msg00133.html
> i.e. we guarantee that:
>    G_TYPE_FROM_INSTANCE (g_object_new (TYPE_FOO, NULL)) == TYPE_FOO.
> holds, you may assert that in your code. we will not break that guarantee.
> 
> let me use your words: we will not substitute types at the GType level.

I see, thank you very much for your patience in describing this, 
for my concerns:
  a.) G_TYPE_FROM_INSTANCE(g_object_new(TYPE_FOO)/foo_new()) == TYPE_FOO
  b.) IS_FOO (g_factory_create (TYPE_FOO))

Knowing that the above assertions hold, completely settles my concern.

Cheers,
                   -Tristan


_______________________________________________
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]