Re: Are Out-of-Tree Widgets Second-Class Citizens?

["Brian J. Tarricone" <bjt23 cornell edu>]

On 10/02/2009 07:17 AM, Allin Cottrell wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Cody Russell wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, 2009-09-28 at 15:12 -0400, Morten Welinder wrote:
>>> This is a consequence of the halfway G_SEALing that was done.
>>> Insofar G_SEAL is a good idea, it should apply to GTK+ itself,
>>> i.e., GtkLabel has no business messing with the internals of
>>> GtkWidget, although obviously it should have access to its own
>>> internals...
>>
>> This is part of the plan for 3.0.  I think the original idea was
>> that 2.18 or 2.90 would GSEAL everything, and 3.0 would actually
>> remove those struct members.  This obviously means that it won't
>> have access to those members anymore and it will have to use
>> either the public APIs or the members of private structs.
> 
> Hmm. I had written earlier,
> 
>>> I'm not sure if the solution Morten advocates -- namely,
>>> applying the GSEAL principle internally -- is the best one,
>>> although maybe it is.
> 
> to which Brian Tarricone replied,
> 
>> It's not even necessary.  Gtk can access struct members directly
>> if desired (for performance reasons, or whatever), but the API
>> should expose them for subclasser use as well.
> 
> These two responses (Cody's and Brian's) don't jive. Any more
> clarification available? Thanks.

Sure they do...  Cody said apps will have to use public APIs instead of
accessing struct members directly.  I just pointed out that some things
don't have accessor functions yet, which is a known issue, judging by
other replies in the thread.

	-brian