2009/12/8 A. Walton <awalton@xxxxxxxxx>: > 2009/12/8 David Nečas <yeti@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >> On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 04:17:40PM -0200, Tristan Van Berkom wrote: >>> 2009/12/7 David Nečas <yeti@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >>> > >>> > Hello, how is subclassing intended to work in Gtk+ 3.0? > * GSEAL() bridges the gap between 2.9x.x and 3.0 by making it easier > to port and see where we're missing accessors. > * Widgets are patched during the 3.0 ABI break so their currently > public struct members are moved to GtkFooPrivate. > * g_type_class_add_private() the GtkFooPrivate struct to prevent some > fragmentation. > * Add a GtkFooPrivate* to the object's public struct, populate it > during gtk_foo_init() with > a single G_TYPE_INSTANCE_GET_PRIVATE() call to speed up access and prevent > duplicate GtkFooPrivate *priv = G_TYPE_INSTANCE_... lines. > + roughly as fast as before, low memory overhead > + code is future-proof and much easier to maintain with proper encapsulation > - accessors are now mandatory, even for subclasses > - code's a bit more ugly (when implementing a widget, 'widget->foo' is > now 'widget->priv->foo'). > > AFAIK this is the 'state of the art' way to write new GObjects, and > it's been the way I've been coding for a while (out of habit). > I believe this is also the way that Vala currently outputs objects. Yes, this is the actual approach. FYI, here an example of migration in the 2.90 branch: http://git.gnome.org/cgit/gtk+/commit/?h=gtk-2-90&id=3451c804c9145cc9f598e6bff0fd8c6aac79923f Regards -- Javier Jardón Cabezas _______________________________________________ gtk-list mailing list gtk-list@xxxxxxxxx http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
