Re: gtkmm 3.0.

[Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>]

On Fri, 2010-03-26 at 17:09 -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
> 2010/3/25 Krzysztof Kosiński <tweenk pl gmail com>:
> 
> > I think sigc::trackable should have protected virtual functions for
> > its slot management operations, so that gtkmm can override them to
> > implement thread safety using GMutex; this would avoid adding a
> > dependency on Glib or Boost to libsigc++.
> 
> i think its worth considering the words of the boost::signals2 people
> on this matter. signals2 has a much nicer, safer and more easily
> thread-safe model for managing connections. they still provide a
> "trackable" base class but its use is deprecated since they could find
> no way to make it acceptably efficient & thread-safe.
> 
> i recently converted the entire backend of ardour from sigc++ signals
> to boost::signals2, and in general i find the signals2 connection
> management model MUCH more satisfactory.

I think (though I'm not sure) that signals will _not_ now be in the new
C++ standard. In the absence of them, we might still just try to use
boost signals* for gtkmm3, copying and renaming them if necessary.

Anybody can make that more likely to happen by trying it in a git
branch.


-- 
murrayc murrayc com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com