Re: [gtk-list] Re: an additional argument flag

[Tero Pulkkinen <terop students cc tut fi>]

> On 22 Feb 1998, Tero Pulkkinen wrote:
> 
> > Deriving from widgets is the only thing we need to do with gtk--. No
> > black magic involved. Deriving from widgets currently requires that
> > we rewrite all *_new() methods. On some widgets this cut/paste is kinda
> > large as there is static methods called from *_new() methods :)

Kenneth Albanowski <kjahds@kjahds.com> writes:
> Have you found some way of deal with class signals (or whatever you want
> to call the signal slots that are held in the class object) in a
> reasonable manner? Then again, C++ isn't an interpreter, so you won't have
> many of the difficulties I ran into with Perl. 

What kind of problems you ran into? Explain more details:.

I thought it would be even easier with dynamically types language where
you dont need to care much about getting type checks to compile time.
I'm pretty happy with the signals implementation we now currently have in
gtk--.

> Don't forget, in C++ your constructor can call the ancestors constructor.
> That doesn't work under gtk+, currently. Which we may want to take as a
> hint. :-)

Yeah, kinda important point.

-- 
-- Tero Pulkkinen -- terop@modeemi.cs.tut.fi --