Re: broken oop ?
- From: Elliot Lee <sopwith redhat com>
- To: gtk-devel-list redhat com
- Subject: Re: broken oop ?
- Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 17:34:25 -0400 (EDT)
On Sat, 15 May 1999, Sergio Kessler wrote:
> ok, but when you work with automated tools to make bindigs, doing
> extra calls that are not part of the original API is, again, a
> pain, usually you have to do it by hand.
Fix the automated tools :-)
> again, if gtk also provide accesors to _read_ (as well write) all
> the properties, gtk would be more cleaner and will allow more changes
> to the internal fields without breaking compatibility, and, of course,
> it will make the life of bindings maker _much_ more easy.
>
> Conclusion: I'am not asking to modify gtk 1.2 (of course), I'm asking
> that if could be possible for authors following some guidelines in
> 1.3 that could really help us *very* much.
>
> For example:
>
> - Use gboolean for boolean fields and boolean functions.
(yes yes)
> - Provide accesors for reading properties.
This will be really really slow compared to direct access.
> - Try to avoid to use something like "flag : x;" wich is not
> supported in other languajes.
This should be trivial to parse in and translate into other language
equivalents...
Something better would to have
#define GTK_PUBLIC
And then do stuff like
typedef struct {
GtkWidget widget;
GTK_PUBLIC gboolean myfield, myfield2 : 1;
} GtkMine;
-- Elliot
"We're sorry, we didn't know it was supposed to be invisible."
- Sign carried outside US embassy.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]