As a compromise between those two suggestions, I'd rather see Gtk::Button, the way it is now, but would have added typedef Glib::RefPtr<Gtk::Button> Gtk::ButtonPtr; And so on for all the widgets/objects. This would make it both comfortable and explicit, and would reduce the number of keystrokes. Anyway uniformity and consistency is important, as it enables, you to write a working code in a more intuitive way.
On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 00:00 +0100, Oscar Lazzarino wrote: > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:55 PM, Germán Diago <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello. I've been using gtkmm for two small projects now. > > From my usage, I would like to make some (realistic) suggestions. > > > > I see there are some pieces of the api where Glib::RefPtr is used, and > > some others where it's not used at all. As gtkmm 3.0 approaches, there's > > an opportunity to break API and ABI. > > > > I would suggest to treat every object in the same way. gtk+ uses > > reference counting. > > What I would suggest is something that gobjectconsume > > (http://live.gnome.org/GObjectIntrospection/GObjectConsume see > > examples) > > already does: > > > > to wrap the c type in this way: > > > > Gtk::Button button("push me"); > > Gtk::Button samebutton = button; //increases reference count. > > > > FWIW, I think keeping explicit RefPtr helps keeping in mind that a > widget should not be copied and can not be placed in multiple places. > > But I agree that some uniformity would be nice (and I would like > seeing RefPtr everywhere). > > O. > _______________________________________________ > gtkmm-list mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
