> Hi, > > "NavEcos" <ecos@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Or why doesn't, say, gdk_threads_enter() say with an ASSERT "hey > > stupid: I noticed that g_thread_init() was never called". > > But that's exactly what the code does: > > void > gdk_threads_init () > { > if (!g_thread_supported ()) > g_error ("g_thread_init() must be called before gdk_threads_init()"); Told you I was stupid. But if you remember, my original message included the fact that I've only been using g_thread_init() in my previous code in GTK 1.3(?) and I have never had an XSync error doing that. My question was, has that always been a bug? Why didn't my previous code ever crash? I've only had problems since I upgraded to 2.x > > I don't want to sound like a little brat here since I really like > > GTK and I really appreciate that it's available to me, but I think a > > couple slight modifications would go a long way into making GTK a > > lot easier to use. GtkInitForStupidPeople (bool bEnableThreads) or > > something, where it does everything for you - as a convenience > > function would be great. I know you can use different contexts and > > stuff like that, but the reality is that only a handful of people > > do. Why not make a "duh" interface? Let's face it, I'm just > > totally stupid, and being very dumb, I like simple interfaces. > > Simple interfaces prevent dumb people like me from filling up lists > > with stupid questions like this, and it reduces bugs too. > > That says it all. I don't deny it. I'm just saying that it's not very intuitive. If previous libraries (IF) didn't require the use of gtk_thread_init() it's pretty bad form, since linking to the new library causes a bug. > Sven > _______________________________________________ gtk-list@xxxxxxxxx http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list