Re: Second draft (was Re: defs files)
- From: Karl Nelson <kenelson ece ucdavis edu>
- To: gtk-devel-list redhat com
- cc: kenelson sequoia ece ucdavis edu
- Subject: Re: Second draft (was Re: defs files)
- Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 16:55:20 -0800
> ===
> (signal signal-name
> (of-object object-we-are-a-signal-of optional-objects-module)
> ;; return value and parameters as for a function, omitting the object
> ;; and user data parameters
>
> ;; what other properties matter for a signal?
> )
>
> Ex:
> (signal select_row
> (of-object CList (Gtk))
> ;; return type defaults to void
> (parameter (type-and-name gint row))
> (parameter (type-and-name gint column))
> (parameter (type-and-name GdkEvent* event)))
>
> ===
Shouldn't the signal have the c-name of emitting function if
the signal is publically callable. Having a signal
and the emit definitions separate means the relationship
is weak. Since we prefer calls to be made to the emitting
function rather then directly with gtk_signal_emit, because
extra checking is done in the emit function.
Defining them separately seems bad.
(Okay, gtk-- is the place that makes the most use out of wrapping
the signals, and the c-function name is one of the primary requirements.
We consider signals to just be extensions of functions.)
--Karl
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]