Re: g_object_get_property could return the GValue passed in, instead of void

[Tim Janik <timj imendio com>]

On Fri, 4 May 2007, Gabriel Schulhof wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I don't know how much of an ABI break this would be, since all current
> code ignores the non-existent return value of g_object_get_property.
>
> OTOH, were we to have
>
> GValue *g_object_get_property (GObject *object, const gchar
> *property_name, GValue *value);
>
> We could do nice things like
>
> GValue val = {0, } ;

where's your g_value_init? you cannot pass an uninitialized GValue into
g_object_get_property().

> g_object_set (G_OBJECT (gtk_entry),
>  "sensitive", g_value_get_boolean (
>    g_object_get_property (G_OBJECT (checkbox), "active", &val)),
>  NULL) ;
>
> This expresses the relationship between the GtkEntry and the
> GtkCheckButton quite clearly. In addition, if you were to switch to a
> GtkToggleToolButton, for example, you wouldn't have to change the code
> at all, because both have the "active" property.

well, if you correctly outline the missing g_value_init/g_value_unset
calls, the example is not so simple anymore...
in any case, feel free to file a bugzilla bug containing an implementation
patch for your requested feature.

> Of course, it would be even nicer to just have a family of functions
> g_object_get_<type> (object, "property") similar to g_value_get_<type>,
> because it would save us the GValue declaration.
>
>
>
> Gabriel

---
ciaoTJ