gnomemm r1153 - in cluttermm/trunk: . clutter/src tools/m4
- From: jjongsma svn gnome org
- To: svn-commits-list gnome org
- Subject: gnomemm r1153 - in cluttermm/trunk: . clutter/src tools/m4
- Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 16:21:17 +0000 (GMT)
Author: jjongsma
Date: 2007-10-28 16:21:16 +0000 (Sun, 28 Oct 2007)
New Revision: 1153
ViewCVS link: http://svn.gnome.org/viewcvs/gnomemm?rev=1153&view=rev
Modified:
cluttermm/trunk/ChangeLog
cluttermm/trunk/clutter/src/color.ccg
cluttermm/trunk/clutter/src/color.hg
cluttermm/trunk/tools/m4/convert_cluttermm.m4
Log:
2007-10-28 Jonathon Jongsma <jjongsma gnome org>
* clutter/src/color.ccg:
* clutter/src/color.hg:
* tools/m4/convert_cluttermm.m4: Finish wrapping the Color class. There are
a couple of utility functions that have a signature like:
void darken(ClutterColor* src, ClutterColor*dest);
These I wrapped to act on the 'this' object (e.g. darken(this, this))
instead of returning a modified copy of the Color. I did this because
otherwise you wouldn't have any way to darken the current object directly,
you'd have to do something like:
Color foo;
Color darkened_foo = foo.darken();
// now use the darkened color you wanted and throw away foo
This means, of course, that if you *do* want to create a darkened copy, you
have to create the copy manually, e.g.:
Color foo;
Color darkened_foo = foo;
darkened_foo.darken();
There are drawbacks to both approaches, but I think the second is more
flexible and feels better to me.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]