Re: [Re: [PATCH] GtkInputDialog signal parameter types]

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

Murray Cumming <murrayc usa net> writes:

> Tim Janik <timj gtk org> wrote:
> > On 15 Oct 2001, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > 
> > > Here's a simple patch that creates the enable-device and enable-device
> signals
> > > with correct parameter types. I assume that the declaration of the
> default
> > > signal handler is the correct one. 
> > 
> > hum, i fail to see where these signals are being emitted, and they
> > don't contain the conventional function wrappers:
> > 
> > void gtk_input_dialog_enable_device  (GtkInputDialog    *inputd,
> >                                       GdkDevice         *device);
> > void gtk_input_dialog_disable_device (GtkInputDialog    *inputd,
> >                                       GdkDevice         *device);
> > 
> > but aren't action signals either.
> > so i wonder whether:
> > - these signals are used anywhere in user code directly
> >   (in which case the above wrappers should be added and
> >   direct emission should be deprecated)
> 
> Owne had previously told me that these types of functions are not necessarily
> just signal-emmiting functions. Can you confirm that methods with the same
> name as signals might do more than just emit the signal? It's relevant to the
> language bindings.

Wow, such confidence in my competence.

Look at say, the implementation of gtk_widget_show().

[ Or just in gtkwidget.c:

  gtk_widget_hide()
  gtk_widget_map()
  gtk_widget_unmap(),
  gtk_widget_realize()
  gtk_widget_unrealize
  gtk_widget_size_allocate(),
  gtk_widget_mnemonic_activate(), 
  gtk_widget_grab_focus() 
]

Functions with the same name as a signal are conventionally in some
some way related to the signal. They _very seldom_ only emit the
signal.

The correspondance between function name and signal name is
_not_ a feature of the GObject system, and any correct binding
for GTK+ must namespace signals and functions separately.

                                        Owen