The sample libabc includes functions to get a "thing", as a sample sub-object of the overall library context. Each "thing" has a reference to the parent library context, and a function to return that reference. Given that, shouldn't abc_thing_new_from_string call abc_ref, and abc_thing_unref call abc_unref?
In particular, consider a language binding for a language with garbage collection, built-in reference counting, or some other mechanism to avoid requiring explicit calls to _unref functions. The creation of a new abc context would call abc_new, and arrange to call abc_unref when the program no longer needs that abc context. Similarly, the creation of a new thing would take an abc context, call abc_thing_new_from_string (or some similar creation function), and arrange to call abc_thing_unref when the program no longer needs that thing. Code in such a language might create an abc, immediately create a thing, use the thing, and let all the now-unreferenced objects get destroyed. If "use the thing" references the thing but not the abc context, the language could decide to call abc_unref immediately after creating the thing, then use the thing, which would have a pointer to an invalid abc context. - Josh Triplett _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
