2008/8/23 Havoc Pennington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> How much more complicated is it for bindings (most of which use ref-counted >> strings themselves) to wrap a reference to a >> string instead of wrapping a whole new copy of the string. > > This one I can answer: most bindings would have to copy the strings > into a native string type just as they do now. A few, maybe Vala and > C++, could conceivably avoid the copy. So refcounted strings would not > matter much for bindings in general but might help the C-like > bindings.
Naturally, they wouldn't have to copy the actual string data and you are forgetting all these "The returned string is owned by the $something object and should not be freed. " All that just magically disappears with ref-counted strings. The bindings become one step simpler because there is one bit less information that they need to account for. -- mvh Björn _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list