Re: GNOME CVS: libbonobo michael

[jacob berkman <jacob ximian com>]

On Wed, 2001-10-31 at 21:49, Michael Meeks wrote:
> 
> Hi Jacob,
> 
> On 31 Oct 2001, jacob berkman wrote:
> > and this doesn't make BonoboObject and GObject behave differently wrt
> > ref/unref of NULL objects (which i really this is a horrible idea,
> > hence my replying to the commit).
> 
>         I imagine in the absence of a pre-condition it is sensible to
> assume that a value can be NULL. Oh ... and since the unref returns NULL
> you can also do ( in your dispose [1] ):

the problem is that you just want to be lazy, and this loses a way to
find problems.  and as havoc demonstrated, it's possible to do what you
want to do, without this lazy hack, in the same amount of code as with
it.

this loses a debug case where you are unref'ing a NULL object, which you
surely shouldn't be doing (just like you shouldn't be showing a NULL
GtkWindow).

programming with gobject/bonobo is already confusing enough without
different ref/unref semantics.  what would it take for you to reconsider
this change?

jacob
-- 
"Beat mixing is 10000 times more fun than even video games."
	-- bt