Re: avoiding relocations in type registration

[Tim Janik <timj imendio com>]

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006, Matthias Clasen wrote:

> On 4/21/06, Tim Janik <timj imendio com> wrote:
> > > GType
> > > g_type_register_static_simple (GType             parent_type,
> > >                              const gchar      *type_name,
> > >                               guint16           class_size,
> >
> > can you make this a guint instead?
> >
> > >                               GClassInitFunc    class_init,
> > >                               guint16           instance_size,
> >
> > and this? i don't think restricting to guint16 here really buys us anything.
>
> sure, I'll change it. I was just copying the types from GTypeInfo.
>
> > > The current trivial implementation fills a GTypeInfo struct on the
> > > stack, but it should be possible to avoid the use of a struct
> > > altogether.
> >
> > you mean inside g_type_register_static_simple? i don't see what's
> > wrong with the way you did it, i'd leave it as that.
>
> What I meant is that check_type_info_I and type_data_make_W poke all
> the fields out of the info struct again; it is not kept around after the node
> is constructed. Thus one could avoid setting up the struct in the first place
> and pass the fields directly to that check_type_info_I and type_data_make_W.
> But 'm fine with keeping the current approach.

one could, yes. but i don't see the point in that, given that 
g_type_register_static() is already written and will have to be
maintained anyway.

> Matthias

---
ciaoTJ