On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:56 PM, Mark Vender <markv...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > On 06/26/2012 07:57 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Mark Vender <markv...@yahoo.co.uk> >> wrote: >> >> >>> It's impossible for an application to break when enum values are added. >>> They >>> end up as integers within the code anyway and unless their values change, >>> API/ABI stays the same. >> >> >> I could think of some ways. But anyway, the keysyms are defines >> because that's how they were done initially, and there's no compelling >> reason to change it. >> > > Well, using enums would make wrapping keysyms much easier on the gtkmm side.
It will also help other bindings to stop doing things such as this: http://git.gnome.org/browse/pygobject/tree/gi/overrides/keysyms.py > Currently the only possible solution is to parse gdkkeysyms.h using a > script similar to gdkkeysyms-update.pl. > > What I don't understand is why a patch must necessarily demonstrate a > big improvement. I'm suggesting only to change In my opinion it would be quite a big improvement. Regards, Tomeu > #define GDK_KEY_*** > <...> > > to > > typedef enum { > GDK_KEY_*** = ***, > <...> > } GdkKeySym; > > which has no chance of negative effects. Even if we add values, they are > still stored in an int, that is, GdkKeySym is never used. Thus, in my > opinion, even a small improvement is worthwhile. > > Cheers, > Mark > > _______________________________________________ > gtk-devel-list mailing list > gtk-devel-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
