On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 10:03 -0800, Philip Langdale wrote: > Murray Cumming wrote: > > > > Like I said, we don't refcount GtkAdjustments, and I don't recommend > > that you do. > > The whole point is that passing copy=true to the Glib::wrap call is > that it does increment the refcount which is then not decremented > when the wrapper is deleted.
And I explained why you shouldn't do that. > So it's doing something with the refcount. > > I'm just asking whether this is the intended semantics of Glib::wrap > or not. It is definitely unexpected for the wrapper to come and go > and leave the ref count at +1. The take_copy parameter is only for use with RefPtr<>. > I have no problem passing copy=false in which case it won't touch > the refcount but the documented semantics for copy=false are that > the wrapper takes ownership of the object which is not what is going > on here. OK. A documentation patch would be welcome. -- Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
