Re: Re:

[Culpian Camilo Martin <camiloculpian gmail com>]

El vie, 28-01-2011 a las 15:11 +0100, Krzesimir Nowak escribió:
> 2011/1/28 Culpian Camilo Martin <camiloculpian gmail com>:
> > El vie, 28-01-2011 a las 14:46 +0100, Krzesimir Nowak escribió:
> >> 2011/1/28 Culpian Camilo Martin <camiloculpian gmail com>:
> >> > ok, i'll try it, i have had some troubles doing this:
> >> >
> >> > class foo
> >> > {
> >> >        static ref_ptr<foo> create
> >> >        (
> >> >                return ref_ptr<foo>(new foo());
> >> >        );
> >> >        foo();
> >> >        ~foo();
> >> >        ref_ptr<foo> set_something()
> >> >        {
> >> >                //set something
> >> >
> >> >                return ref_ptr<foo>(this);
> >> >                //for using foo->set_something()->set_something();
> >> >                // oviously the ref_ptr delete "this", and cause a segfault
> >> >                // any idea how can avoid this?
> >> >        }
> >> > }
> >>
> >> Would be good to show what is this ref_ptr class...
> >>
> >> If the below code segfaults then maybe copy constructor of ref_ptr
> >> does not increment reference count.
> >>
> >> ref_ptr<foo> f = foo::create();
> >> f->set_something()->set_something();
> >
> > the problem is not when i do this:
> >
> > ref_ptr<foo> f = foo::create();
> > f->set_something()->set_something();
> >
> > the problem is when i do this:
> >
> > class foo_b : public foo
> > {
> >        static ref_ptr<foo_b> create()
> >        {
> >                return ref_ptr<foo_b>(new foo_b());
> >        }
> >        foo_b();
> >        ~foo_b();
> > }
> >
> > when i do:
> >
> > foo_b foob = foo_b::create();
> > foob->set_something(); //here ref_ptr delete the object member class
> > foo... this is what i can't do right.
> 
> Now I see. An option would be:
> 1. returning void instead of ref_ptr to this.
> 2. coding the reference count inside foo_b, instead of in ref_ptr.
> 
> I would opt for first solution.
yes, but if i extend from Glib::Object, and i use Glib::RefPtr, wouldn't
be a better and elegant solution? or it is not possible?