On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 11:09 -0500, José Alburquerque wrote: > On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 17:55 -0500, José Alburquerque wrote: > > On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 23:35 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote: > > > To automatically add emit_*_signal() methods? Maybe, but how would we > > > know which signals should be emitted by applications instead of just > > > handled? I can't believe that all signals should be emitted. > > > > What I was thinking is iterating through the signals and testing for the > > G_SIGNAL_ACTION flag (from the GSignalFlags enum[1]). Methods can be > > generated for the ones with the flag. Maybe the method names can be > > adapted from the signal name.
Is there any gstreamer documentation that says that G_SIGNAL_ACTION should be interpreted as "applications can, and might need to, emit this signal themselves."? > > The g_signal_emit()[2] docs say that an optional final argument for the > > return value can be included in the arglist. But in C++, I suppose it > > can be the method return. > > The attached patch modifies the plug-in generator to output lines when > it encounters an action signal in a plug-in. It can clarify which > signals might be wrapped as methods and which would not be. > -- [email protected] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
