On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 12:45:09PM +0100, Peter Clifton wrote: > This seems to break the MVC abstraction - if the model changes > drastically, I need to know which tree-views are connected so I can > disconnect them? Bad! > > We need some new API I guess - which signals any connected views that > the data it has cached about the model should be invalidated, and that > the model may be changing without emitting signals. > > Once the model is updated, a further signal will inform the view that it > can keep cached state again. In practise this won't be all that different compared to setting a new model on the tree view, except that with a signal it will be initiated from the model. After the model emits the "I am finished changing everything" signal, the tree view will have to rebuild its internal rbtree by iterating over the full model again (any other model that is connected to this model will have to rebuild its internal state tree too), since it has no clue what has changed. This will probably also involve unreferencing all nodes when the model emits "invalidate" and re-reference the new nodes after the mass changing, and remembering selection and expansion state during the mass-changing (this information is kept in the internal rbtree too), etc. I think a much better solution would be to be able to group a bunch of changes together in a kind of "atomic changeset" which is then emitted with a single signal. All connected views/models could then process the full changeset in one pass. (Possibly this could also add/remove ranges of nodes, etc). regards, -kris. _______________________________________________ gtk-list mailing list gtk-list@xxxxxxxxx http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
