Re: g_param_spec_pointer

[Tim Janik <timj gtk org>]

On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, James Henstridge wrote:

> I was just going through the GParamSpec code (I am implementing property 
> support for types defined in python), and noticed that there is no 
> standard param spec for types derived from G_TYPE_POINTER (created with 
> g_pointer_type_register_static(), such as GtkCTreeNode).
> 
> Maybe g_param_spec_pointer() should be changed to take a "GType 
> pointer_type" argument.  Unfortunately, this is an API change :(  Any 
> ideas about this?  It isn't so critical, because derived types still 
> work with the current param spec type.

yeah, now that deriving from G_TYPE_POINTER actually presents some
usefullness, i'd actually implement that function as:

GParamSpec*
g_param_spec_pointer (const gchar *name,
                      const gchar *nick,
                      const gchar *blurb,
/* new argument: */   GType        pointer_type,
                      GParamFlags  flags)
{
  GParamSpecPointer *pspec;

  g_return_val_if_fail (g_type_is_a (pointer_type, G_TYPE_POINTER), NULL);

  pspec = g_param_spec_internal (G_TYPE_PARAM_POINTER,
                                 name,
                                 nick,
                                 blurb,
                                 flags);
  G_PARAM_SPEC (ospec)->value_type = pointer_type;

  return G_PARAM_SPEC (pspec);
}

note that you can still create a function like the above, e.g.
named g_param_spec_typed_pointer(), since g_param_spec_internal()
is an exported symbol. having that functionality in
g_param_spec_pointer() would be better though.
i don't actually expect much third party code to rely on
g_param_spec_pointer() yet, so it might be worth persuing this API
change on gnome-2-0-list, if you want to do that, you'd definitely
have my support.

> 
> James.
> 

---
ciaoTJ