On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 05:35:29AM -0400, Frediano Ziglio wrote: > > > > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 03:35:50PM -0500, Jonathon Jongsma wrote: > > > ok, I'll take some added typesafety over a having to pass the ->parent > > > occasionally > > > > Explicitly passing ->parent does not scale well though if you start > > adding intermediate classes in the inheritance tree. > > > > Christophe > > > > It all started when I wanted to remove/move some fields from a > structure and finding that code continued to compile but just > crashed... sometimes! > Usually plain C you are expecting a compilation failure when > fields/function disappears from source. This is IMHO a good > thing of static languages, lot of stuff are done by the > compiler. > > When we talked about moving to C++ to solve these issues you > said that having more code was not an issue and "just a > problem of copy & paste"... did you change your mind? Well, this reference is more about the boilerplate to declare a class in gobject VS C++, which indeed is mostly a matter of c&p. I don't think I ever said that you'd get as much support for the compiler with gobject than with C++, which is the issue you are having here and with your "unsafe cast" worries. Christophe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel