Re: PATCH: add second argument to GWeakNotify

[Jonathan Blandford <jrb redhat com>]

James Henstridge <james daa com au> writes:

> On 17 Aug 2001, Owen Taylor wrote:
> 
> > > as far as i'm concerned, you can commit this if you stay with
> > > typedef void (*GWeakNotify)            (gpointer      data);
> > > for the public API and just add the object internally.
> > > this patch requires doc updates also though.
> >
> > I agree with James and Jonathan - "hiding" the second argument
> > is just ugly. I don't think forcing people to look at docs
> > is an excuse for making interfaces confusing.
> >
> > The naming 'where_the_object_was' is a pretty good red flag
> > already ...
> >
> > I'd much rather see this committed the way James has written it.
> >
> > And yes, we do need docs.
> 
> So should I include the second argument in the prototype or not then?

Yes++

-Jonathan