Re: [glade--]Re: [gtkmm] Problem with gtkmm handling comboboxes from glade

[Daniel Elstner <daniel elstner gmx net>]

Am Mon, 2001-12-03 um 11.53 schrieb Murray Cumming:
> On Mon, 2001-12-03 at 11:33, Christof Petig wrote:
> > Murray Cumming wrote:
> > 
> > > On Mon, 2001-12-03 at 09:32, Christof Petig wrote:
> > > > > I'd rather not risk breaking the ABI, or other code that uses SArray. If
> > > > > it can be fixed with a change to glademm then that would be better.
> > > >
> > > > I will not remove a sensible const (and ruin the generated code forever) because RH
> > > > shipped gcc-2.96.

Yes.  People should update their compiler.  Since when are we starting
to work around bugs in other OSS packages?

> > > I have not followed this in detail, but this doesn't seem to be the same
> > > conclusion that was drawn last time this came up:
> > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=100494551700001&w=2&r=1
> 
> I still need this to be answered. The previous discussion seemed to
> suggest that there was something wrong with the declaration used by
> glademm.

It wasn't wrong, but redundant and weird-looking.  It seems we have now
finally sorted this out.

> > > > I would tolerate a --for-gcc-2-96 command line switch (which might try to
> > > > auto-detect the compiler used). Are there any RH fans around which step ahead to
> > > > implement this?
> > >
> > > Wouldn't it be better to just use a std::vector? That would be clearer
> > > anyway.
> > 
> > Do you prefer
> >   x.push_back("A");
> >   x.push_back("B");
> >   x.push_back("C");
> > over
> >    { "A", "B", "C" ... }
> 
> But that's not what you have. You have a confusing declaration of an array of gchar*
> 
> > ?
> > 
> > I do not.
> > Yes I agree it would be clearer. But it looks horrible to me
> 
> But it would work.

I don't think it'd be clearer.  The way it's now is the only way in C++
to generate an array at compile time.  And why would you want to
generate an array at runtime if you can do it at compile time?

> > (and considerung the
> > compiled code size, I would guess that the first variant is much bigger (inlining), but I
> > don't have numbers)
> 
> I doubt that this is of any relevance.

The predefined array needs _no_ code at all.  So the vector variant must
be bigger in any case.

Just my 2 cents,
--Daniel


> -- 
> Murray Cumming
> murrayc usa net
> www.murrayc.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> to unsubscribe or change your subscription parameters :
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gtkmm-main