On Fri, 8 Dec 2006, Damon Chaplin wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 13:13 +0100, Tim Janik wrote:
>>> Applications could then use different sets of widgets for different
>>> parts of the interface, just by switching the default factory:
>>> gtk_set_default_object_factory (factory);
>>
>> the only differences i see are that you didn't introduce the factory at
>> GLib level, and that you seem to advocate multiple factories.
>> i'm not quite sure why though, can you give more concrete examples on
>> why i would want to switch factories at all?
>
> I don't have any specific examples. I just thought using a factory was a
> more flexible approach - better than adding XXX_appoint_type() functions
> for each widget.
ok thanks for the input. upon reflection, using a factory API simplifies
the implementation and also API on the Gtk+ side, so it's probably the
better idea.
i'm still interested in hearing use cases for multiple factories though,
so if anyone has arguments for allowing multiple GFactory* handles instead
of just two "singleton" functions:
/* craete instance conforming to prerequisite_type */
g_factory_create (GType prerequisite_type);
/* appoint an implementaiton_type for a prerequisite_type */
g_factory_appoint_type (GType prerequisite_type,
GType implementation_type);
please speak up.
> Damon
>
---
ciaoTJ
_______________________________________________
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
