On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 10:02 +0200, Mikael Hallendal wrote: > Hi, > > Why not simply keep gtk_hbox_new and gtk_vbox_new? > > I can see a number of reasons for doing so: > > 1) They are used all over the place > 2) The cost of maintaining them are next to zero > 3) They make sense on their own, > gtk_hbox_new instead of gtk_box_new (HORIZONTAL, ...) > > I think removing the classes but keep gtk_hbox_new/gtk_vbox_new that > simply creates a GtkBox with the correct orientation is the right > approach here.
I disagree. If we keep gtk_hbox_new() and gtk_vbox_new() around, we can't change the packing defaults, which is a *huge* benefit of introducing a new class with new API (GtkBox was abstract before, so now allowing to instantiate it is in fact a new widget, and that has to be reflected in *new* API to be able to change its behavior). Also, can we simply change the return value of functions? (returning a GtkBox where we used to return GtkVBox and GtkHBox). ciao, --mitch _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
