Re: gtkmm and boost

["Paul Davis" <pjdavis engineering uiowa edu>]

On 8/14/07, Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 12:01 -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
> > Like you mention, its always going to be a balancing act.
> >
> > I think the thing you need to remember when thinking about changing
> > parts of the backend of Gtkmm is that it *is* a wrapper around Gtk.
> > There's no getting around that. Replacing things like Glib::RefPtr
> > with boost::shared_ptr are probably just not going to happen.
>
> It's not entirely impossible. This suggests how to do it, though I've
> never been brave enough to make this change:
> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104332
>
> > There will always be a whole host of issues that would simply not
> > exist if the original Gtk were written in C++. But had it been, it
> > probably would've been replaced by somethg else by now.
>
> But we are very ambitious, so we shouldn't give up too easily.
>
> --
> murrayc murrayc com
> www.murrayc.com
> www.openismus.com
>
>

Holy crap is all I can say. Reading through the comments I could see
how that would work, but I'd definitely want to put that in a sandbox
and have *lots* of people test out their applications using the new
code base in a way where we could just trash it if things start to get
too wonky.

---
Completely off topic, I've just switched employers and I don't know
how much I'll be working with Gtkmm in the future. So if I seem to
disapear, its not caues I died or anything.

Paul Davis