Re: gtkmm 3.0: Removing ListHandle, SListHandle, etc

[José Alburquerque <jaalburquerque cox net>]

On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 19:16 +0200, michi7x7 wrote: 
> Am 2010-05-27 09:09, schrieb Guillaume Brocker:
> > Le 27/05/2010 08:19, Murray Cumming a écrit :
> >>
> >> I would prefer not to make the methods templated unless there is a
> >> strong reason. I generally like the efficiency of having implementation
> >> in .cc files, along with the ability to correct the code by releasing a
> >> new gtkmm version, without requiring recompilation of applications.
> >
> > I think you've pointed a very good reason to avoid templates. So I 
> > think std::vector is a reasonable choice.
> >
> You could also define the function in the header-file, so no recompiling 
> of GTKmm is required.

But then that would require developers to recompile their applications
each time there is a modification to the function.  I think the point is
to not make it necessary for applications to recompile when new releases
are made because the library maintains ABI compatibility with previous
releases.  Besides, that doesn't sound like good C++.

> Another possibility is to define more than one function to access, but 
> it depends on whether this object is used within the class too or not.
> _______________________________________________
> gtkmm-list mailing list
> gtkmm-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list

-- 
José