Re: out of memory handler

[Baurjan Ismagulov <ibr ata cs hun edu tr>]

Hello Tristan,

On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 02:21:49PM -0500, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> but seriously, I think it would be a noble cause to make `abort()' on oom
> optional but it would require alot of work. The entire GTK+ codebase would
> have to be refactored. To start with: class / instance initialization
> functions in
> GObject would have to support oom conditions and return FALSE if they werent 
> capable to allocate enough resources (right now they return `void').
> 
> many many lines of code... But IMO, definitly a noble cause :)

I've thought about this, but I don't have that much time right now -- it
would imply redefinition of interfaces. What I was asking about was just
to define something like g_set_oom_handler and call it instead of
abort(). So, my question remains: would it be enough to modify g_error?

With kind regards,
Baurjan.