Re: GtkBuilder Public API - Last call

[Yevgen Muntyan <muntyan tamu edu>]

Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On 6/13/07, Yevgen Muntyan <muntyan tamu edu> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Um, then gtk_widget_get/set_name is going to be deprecated?
> > > gtk_widget_set_name() sets widget->name member, and that structure
> > > member is used (in particular?) by themes, that's how it works.
> > > What does "name of GtkBuildable" mean?
> > >
> >
> > In any case, the question "Does GtkBuilder call
> > gtk_widget_set_name(widget, "name_from_xml_file")" still
> > stands. It can be important since it will break widgets which
> > set name in a constructor or before (some do, e.g. to modify
> > cursor color). And it can become actually important now,
> > since until glade-3 it was rather impossible to use fancy
> > non-stock widgets. Or, if other code relies on "widget
> > name" being name from xml, setting the name to modify
> > style will break that other code.
>
> Yes, GtkBuilder calls gtk_widget_set_name. I don't see how that will 
> break
> anything, though - GtkUIManager does the same, as does libglade.

Right, GtkUIManager as well as libglade hardly use non-stock
widgets now (see above). How many glade files use GtkSourceView
for instance? (or GtkUIManager xml description, for that matter)

> Widgets which set a name in a constructor are already semi-broken
> anyway. Widget names are supposed to be an application/user feature,
> not something thats used in the implementation of a widget.

Programmers are also not supposed to set style properties. Nevertheless
it happens, and widget name is one of tools for that. It is a documented
use which shouldn't break, isn't it?
How do you draw the line between "implementation of a widget" and
"an application" part exactly? Note that what you said makes it look
like calling gtk_widget_set_name() by a widget implementation is
not supposed to happen; while doing it by GtkBuilder is indeed right
and good; is it quite logical? GtkBuilder is more a user than the widget?

Yevgen