Re: #107397 (Re: type_info macro generation ...)

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

While, in general, I'd have done it a little differently (simpler)
what you have basically looks good, with two caveats:

- being able to define multiple types in one file is, I think, 
  very important. 

  I don't think the macro should take a non-prefixed name like
  parent_class. If you want the magic parent_class setup, then
  I think it should be prefixed like 'gtk_entry_parent_class'

- I don't really like G_DEFINE_TYPE_WITH_CODE as a name ... 
  it isn't at all clear why you want 'code' there, what
  'code' you are allowed to add, or 

   G_DEFINE_TYPE_WITH_INTERFACES()

  would, I think, make things a lot easier to read. Using
  the 'code' name makes people study the macro definition.

Regards,
						Owen