Re: outdated wrong comment in gtkobject.h?

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

On Fri, 2003-03-28 at 18:12, Britton wrote:
> In gtkobject.h I read the following:
> 
> /* The GtkObjectClass is the base of the Gtk+ objects classes hierarchy,
>  * it ``inherits'' from the GtkTypeClass by mirroring its fields, which
>  * must always be kept in sync completely. The GtkObjectClass defines
>  * the basic necessities for the object inheritance mechanism to work.
>  */
> struct _GtkObjectClass
> {
>   GObjectClass parent_class;
> 
>   /* Non overridable class methods to set and get per class arguments */
>   void (*set_arg) (GtkObject *object,
> 		   GtkArg    *arg,
> 		   guint      arg_id);
>   void (*get_arg) (GtkObject *object,
> 		   GtkArg    *arg,
> 		   guint      arg_id);
> 
>   /* The function that will end an objects life time. In one way ore
>    *  another all three of them are defined for all objects. If an
>    *  object class overrides one of the methods in order to perform class
>    *  specific destruction then it must still invoke its superclass'
>    *  implementation of the method after it is finished with its
>    *  own cleanup. (See the destroy function for GtkWidget for
>    *  an example of how to do this).
>    */
>   void (*destroy)  (GtkObject *object);
> };
> 
> The thing is that GtkTypeClass seems to be typedef'd to GTypeClass, which
> seems to consist of a single GType, which in turn is something like a
> nsigned integer.  So I don't see how it can be true that the fields are
> being kept in sync.  Maybe this is an old comment and no longer correct?
> 
> Thanks for any explanation you can offer,

Yes, it's an outdated old comment. If it bothers you, you might
want to file a bug in bugzilla.gnome.org (see the GTK+ README
for for info about filing bugs)

Regards,
                                                 Owen