Re: Stupid question regarding g_thread_init() and gtk_threads_init()
- From: Sven Neumann <sven gimp org>
- To: "NavEcos" <ecos navosha com>
- Cc: Arnaud Charlet <charlet ACT-Europe FR>, gtk-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Stupid question regarding g_thread_init() and gtk_threads_init()
- Date: 28 Jul 2004 04:35:24 +0200
"NavEcos" <ecos navosha com> writes:
> Or why doesn't, say, gdk_threads_enter() say with an ASSERT "hey
> stupid: I noticed that g_thread_init() was never called".
But that's exactly what the code does:
if (!g_thread_supported ())
g_error ("g_thread_init() must be called before gdk_threads_init()");
> I don't want to sound like a little brat here since I really like
> GTK and I really appreciate that it's available to me, but I think a
> couple slight modifications would go a long way into making GTK a
> lot easier to use. GtkInitForStupidPeople (bool bEnableThreads) or
> something, where it does everything for you - as a convenience
> function would be great. I know you can use different contexts and
> stuff like that, but the reality is that only a handful of people
> do. Why not make a "duh" interface? Let's face it, I'm just
> totally stupid, and being very dumb, I like simple interfaces.
> Simple interfaces prevent dumb people like me from filling up lists
> with stupid questions like this, and it reduces bugs too.
That says it all.
] [Thread Prev