Re: copying sigc::signals

[Jonathon Jongsma <jonathon quotidian org>]

On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 17:51 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 10:40 -0600, Jonathon Jongsma wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 14:15 +0000, Chris Vine wrote:
> > > 
> > > It is probably better simply to disallow copying of signals, rather
> > > than do shallow copies resulting in the curious effects you mention.  I
> > > took that line when writing some signal/slot classes of my own for use
> > > where libsigc++ was not suitable because it is not thread safe.  (But
> > > these also happen to implement trackability at the signal level.)
> > 
> > I think this would be my preferred solution as well, though I haven't
> > really considered what all the effects of that would be.  In any case, I
> > don't think the behavior is likely to change in the near future, so I
> > just wanted people to be aware of the issue.
> 
> If you file a bug then we can fix it when we do ABI breaks for gtkmm 3
> eventually. Of course, I'd rather have a new C++ standard real soon that
> let us use its signals instead. Not likely though.

Bug filed: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=611941

Chris, feel free to add your thoughts there as well, as you clearly
understand the internals of sigc++ more than I do (I only glanced at the
internals briefly after discovering this behavior).

-- 
Jonathon Jongsma <jonathon quotidian org>