On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 22:10:39 +0200 (CEST) Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 6.06.2017 21:41 Chris Vine <vine35792468@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > [...] > > No one is suggesting reworking. This is no more than intellectual > > interest in the original design choice. > > I wasn't around when this design choice was made so I can only > guess. I can only repeat what Tristan has already said: > this is a feature of GInitiallyUnowned and its descendants > rather than all GObject instances. At least that was originally, > maybe it was changed later but remained to avoid breaking the > backward compatibility. GObjects not derived from GInitiallyUnowned are indeed weird, as I think you are suggesting. They start with a reference count of 1 but without an owner. But on further thought I suspect you are right: the floating reference was to circumvent this problem. So I guess the question is why pure (non-GInitiallyUnowned) GObjects start with a reference count of 1, instead of a count of 0 as in other similar implementations. Starting with a count of 0 would have made floating references unnecessary. Chris _______________________________________________ gtk-list mailing list gtk-list@xxxxxxxxx https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
