Re: [GSoC] GtkBuilder + GBinding: Connecting transformation functions

[Denis Washington <denisw online de>]

Am 20.07.2011 18:09, schrieb Denis Washington:
> Hi,
>
> As you might know, I have created a GTK+ branch on git.gnome.org (named
> "gtkbuilder-gbinding") which adds a <binding> element to the GtkBuilder
> syntax for my GSoC project [1]. Now I would like to add support for
> specifying a transformation function from the source to the target
> property value for a binding. Like signal handlers currently, such
> tranformation functions should be automatically connectable by a
> GtkBuilder object.
>
> The question now is where to put this connection logic. There are
> essentially two options:
>
> * Do this in gtk_builder_connect_signals(). This lets me reuse the code
> that's already there, which, given that the needed operations are almost
> exactly the same, would be nice. However, this makes connect_signals()
> kind of a misnomer, as it would then connect signals *and* tranformation
> functions. (A gtk_builder_connect() alias could be introduced to
> alleviate this.)
>
> * Introduce a new gtk_builder_connect_bindings() (or similarly named)
> function. This would have the advantage that connect_signals() would
> continue to do only what the name implies. However, this will probably
> mean some duplication of work and would require GTK+ users to call two
> instead of one connection function with the exact same arguments.
>
> As I naturally would like to have my branch merged into GTK+ master
> eventually, I am asking you for your thoughts on this matter.

As I didn't receive any feedback yet, I went ahead and moved all 
property binding creation code to two new public functions 
gtk_builder_create_bindings() and gtk_builder_create_bindings_full() for 
now (all in my "gtkbuilder-gbinding" branch, naturally). They work 
exactly like gtk_builder_connect_signals*(). The code is pushed to 
git.gnome.org and ready for review. (There most probably won't be any 
other feature that will be added to the GTK+ branch, so I consider it 
feature-complete.)

Regards,
Denis