Hi Tomeu, On Sep 24, 2010, at 01:20 PM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: >On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 13:02, Barry Warsaw <barry python org> wrote: >> Hi folks, >> >> I'm wondering if anyone has any thoughts on this bug: >> >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glib2.0/+bug/638513 >> >> While the OP fixed his problem by changing the signal name, it still >> strikes me as bad that the incorrect signal name can lead to a >> Python crash. I only spent a little bit of time debugging this and >> am not familiar enough with the code. Is this a legitimate bug in >> pygtk/pygobject? If so, is there an open bug on the issue already >> (my limited searching on bugzilla did not turn one up). > >I see this as a consequence of the lack of a way for marking glib API >as not consumable by bindings. gobject-introspection has such a thing >and we'll get eventually. > >Even then, mind that unless the Gtk+ developers change their mind >radically, PyGObject won't be able to guarantee that your process >won't crash when passing incorrect arguments. This is because of how >the C implementation has (and lacks) asserts at the start of each >function. Thanks for the feedback. >There's some bug in bugzilla about it but cannot find it right now. -Barry
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature