Re: PATCH: add second argument to GWeakNotify
- From: Tim Janik <timj gtk org>
- To: James Henstridge <james daa com au>
- Cc: Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>, Gtk+ Developers <gtk-devel-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: PATCH: add second argument to GWeakNotify
- Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:56:31 +0200 (CEST)
On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, James Henstridge wrote:
> On 17 Aug 2001, Owen Taylor wrote:
>
> > > as far as i'm concerned, you can commit this if you stay with
> > > typedef void (*GWeakNotify) (gpointer data);
> > > for the public API and just add the object internally.
> > > this patch requires doc updates also though.
> >
> > I agree with James and Jonathan - "hiding" the second argument
> > is just ugly. I don't think forcing people to look at docs
> > is an excuse for making interfaces confusing.
> >
> > The naming 'where_the_object_was' is a pretty good red flag
> > already ...
> >
> > I'd much rather see this committed the way James has written it.
> >
> > And yes, we do need docs.
>
> So should I include the second argument in the prototype or not then?
sigh, go ahead and introduce yet-another-casting-nightmare.
>
> James.
>
---
ciaoTJ
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]