Re: Non-atomicity in gtk_list_store_insert(), gtk_list_store_set()

Jonathan Blandford schrieb:
Federico Mena Quintero <federico ximian com> writes:

The idea is to call it like this:

	gtk_list_store_insert_and_set (list_store, &iter, N,
				       0, "foo",
				       1, "bar",

This would make the insertion+modification atomic; the append_and_set()
version would be analogous.  Only the "insert-row" signal would be

A very good idea (also since iterator dereferences slow gtkmm down considerably, there are similar patches [] floating around as a remedy).

IIRC you missed the parent argument ...

Isn't append_and_set simply passing -1 for position - a separate function would be overkill IMHO (though gtk+ tends to go that way)?

A GValue variant would be a good idea, too. Especially C++ people tend to put (boxed) objects into ListStores.

Perhaps insert_before/insert_after are far more efficient (I don't know the implementation details), so replacing them (too) would make it even faster.

This function is probably fine to add.  A couple comments:

 * I am not really sold on the name.  I think insert_with_values sounds
   a bit better.

I like that name too.

 * We also need a non-varargs version for language bindings.


Should we have this, and deprecate the old insert()/append() functions? set() can remain in place, as it is needed to modify existing rows.

I'd rather not deprecate the old functions here.  It doesn't buy us anything.

But a comment should tell the users to prefer the new variant because of atomicity and speed.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]