Re: g_object_new(G_TYPE_OBJECT, NULL)

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

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


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