Re: GtkObject is gone (was GTK3 breakage)

[Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>]

On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 10:11 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 09:55 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> 
> > We could just unref the underlying object, but once the wrapping C++
> > object has been destroyed, the vfuncs (and default signal handlers) will
> > fall back to default C implementations, if any, and this could even
> > cause different UI behaviour.
> > 
> > If I must, then I'll force Gtk::CellRenderer and Gtk::TreeViewColumn to
> > be used only via RefPtr<>, like other reference-counted objects, but
> > this will probably just annoy C++ programmers. They feel like widgets,
> > so it seems odd for them to not have similar memory management.
> 
> g_object_run_dispose() is very similar to gtk_widget_destroy() in terms
> of memory management semantics. 

Yes, after talking on irc we came to the same conclusion.

> The main difference is that there's no ::destroy signal emitted.

For some reason we use a qdata destroy callback to detect GObject
destruction anyway, instead of the "destroy" signal.
 
-- 
murrayc murrayc com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com