Re: Removing _construct functions when fixing _new() functions.

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

murrayc t-online de (Murray Cumming) writes:

> On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 16:08, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > I have 3 patches here
> > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=77225
> > to make libbonoboui's various widgets' *_new() functions into mere
> > convenience wrappers for g_object_new(). This is achieved by adding
> > properties. That's what's they're supposed to be, for the sake of
> > language bindings and glade.
> > 
> > While doing this I've removed the old *_construct() functions. They were
> > the GTK1.2 way to solve this problem.
> > 
> > Officially, this breaks API, but only language bindings (not many for
> > libbonoboui yet) and glade (doesn't seem to affect it yet) are going to
> > notice, and they should stop using *_construct() anyway. It doesn't make
> > much difference, but when *_construct() are removed it makes it easier
> > to see that libbonoboui does things properly.
> 
> Furthermore, it's very difficult to have the _construct() functions
> _and_ the properties. If you refuse this then I will probably have to
> remove the properties, meaning that libbonoboui will remain broken and
> might never be usable from glade-like stuff.

Well, one method of handling this is to improve the widgets so that the
construct properties are not construct-only, so you can make your 
construct function simply set the properties in question.

(I think actually that a lot of construct() functions outside of GTK+
were added, incorrectly, on the theory "the new() function takes arguments
so we must have a construct() function".)

Regards,
                                        Owen