Re: The use of RefPtr

[Hubert Figuiere <hub figuiere net>]

On 03/07/2009 01:07 AM, Eddie Carle wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 09:34 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 18:29 -0700, Eddie Carle wrote:
> > > Is there any way to assign the
> > > TreeModel to the ComboBox without passing it through a RefPtr?
> > No.
>
> Actually, in retrospect, it needn't be so complicated. I supposed if one
> wants their TreeModel dynamically allocated, they could call reference()
> on it manually once and then build a RefPtr from it's address so that no
> calls to unreference() by RefPtr ever actually delete it. Then the only
> way it can be deconstructed is by going out of scope. Would this be
> considered safe or unwise?

Except that it is inconsistent with the rest of Gtkmm, and also what 
Gtkmm does is what Gtk+ does.

There is no point in trying to make things more complex to make on case 
marginally less complex. It is not like you have to track the model to 
delete it when needed.

Also the last bit: even if you idea had an advantage, it woudln't be 
feasible without breaking the ABI. That's something the Gtkmm 
maintainers have been trying to avoid.

Hub