Re: delete-event of GtkWidget

[Enrico TrÃger <enrico troeger uvena de>]

On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 12:24:45 +0000, tomas tuxteam de wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 03:52:24PM +0100, Enrico TrÃger wrote:
> > On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 05:34:27 +0000, tomas tuxteam de wrote:
> >
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 19, 2007 at 06:52:03PM +0100, Enrico TrÃger wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > when I write big dialogs, I create it only once, keep the
> > > > pointer to the dialog [...]
> [...]
> > > I didn't understand exactly. Do you mean that you *don't* handle
> > > the delete event [...]
>
> > I connected to the delete-event and registered gtk_widget_hide as
> > callback.
>
> Ah-hah. Now I think I got it.
>
> >           Re-showing(gtk_widget_show) worked in Debian and crashed
> > in PuppyLinux. Now, I register gtk_widget_hide_on_delete as
> > callback and then the widget won't be destroyed and all is fine.
>
> So basically it boils down to the difference in behaviour between
> gtk_widget_hide() (used as a callback for the delete event) and
> gtk_widget_hide_on_delete(). Did I get it right this time?
>
> Note that the delete event *wants* a callback returning a boolean. If
> it returns TRUE, the following chain of events leading to the widget's
Yes, I misused gtk_widget_hide and already fixed my code.

> OTOH Yeti's interpretation is at least as likely: the widget gets
> destroyed anyway, but its guts still lie around on the heap, so it is
> seemingly functional.
Obviously, I just wondered about the different behaviour of different
systems. I tested it also under Windows and there it is like in Debian,
the widget is still functional even though only by accident or some
other magic ;-).

Regards,
Enrico

--
Get my GPG key from http://www.uvena.de/pub.key