Re: [Re: gobject weak references]

[Murray Cumming <murrayc usa net>]

Sven Neumann <sven gimp org> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Murray Cumming <Murray_Cumming betaresearch de> writes:
> 
> > Actually I think that your example is a bit hackish. I would prefer to
> > use an ID that's passed through data or is stored in the object's
> > quark-data-thing mechanism. If there's no absolute need to use an
> > invalid pointer then we shouldn't give people the opportunity.
> 
> I don't think it is hackish at all. The pointer is not invalid, it's
> only not pointing to a functional GObject anymore since the GObject
> is in the process of being finalized when the notifier is being called.
> Why would you want to add the overhead of an ID mechanism if there
> already is a perfectly valid ID, the memory address of the GObject?

Oh, OK, if the memory hasn't been freed yet then I have no problem with using
the pointer.

Murray Cumming
murrayc usa net
www.murrayc.com