Re: g_object_new(G_TYPE_OBJECT, NULL)

[Tim Janik <timj imendio com>]

On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, ANDREW PAPROCKI, BLOOMBERG/ 731 LEXIN wrote:

> Everyone, is there any reason why anyone would want to instantiate actual
> GObjects using g_object_new(G_TYPE_OBJECT, NULL)? As a follow-up to that
> question, was there a design decision in mind when not flagging GObject
> G_TYPE_FLAG_ABSTRACT to prevent this? What can one say to someone who wishes to
> do this? In my opinion, it just *feels* wrong... All over the documentation,
> GObject is referred to as a "base" class, but that implies abstract to me
> because the intention is for everyone to created subclassed types. Am I missing
> something?

to make a long story short: do you actually meant to ask whether we forgot to
add G_TYPE_FLAG_ABSTRACT to g_object_get_type(), and if it would be ok to add
that now?
then, the answer is probably yes.

> Andrew Paprocki
> Bloomberg LP

---
ciaoTJ