New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implement Value traits inside glib_wrapper!() instead of doing it gen… #196

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jul 13, 2017

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@sdroege
Member

sdroege commented Jul 12, 2017

…erically

This is needed to be able to create implementations for other pointer
types, e.g. boxed types, without creating overlapping implementations.

@EPashkin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@EPashkin

EPashkin Jul 12, 2017

Member

Seems Gir need changed before this to add use gobject_ffi

Member

EPashkin commented Jul 12, 2017

Seems Gir need changed before this to add use gobject_ffi

@EPashkin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@EPashkin

EPashkin Jul 12, 2017

Member

Oh, missed that you already added it.

Member

EPashkin commented Jul 12, 2017

Oh, missed that you already added it.

Show outdated Hide outdated src/object.rs

@EPashkin EPashkin referenced this pull request Jul 12, 2017

Merged

Update #176

@EPashkin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@EPashkin

EPashkin Jul 12, 2017

Member

👍 after after fixes

Member

EPashkin commented Jul 12, 2017

👍 after after fixes

@sdroege

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@sdroege

sdroege Jul 12, 2017

Member

Done. And you need to merge all the others ones at the same time to keep things working

Member

sdroege commented Jul 12, 2017

Done. And you need to merge all the others ones at the same time to keep things working

@sdroege sdroege closed this Jul 12, 2017

@sdroege sdroege reopened this Jul 12, 2017

Implement Value traits inside glib_wrapper!() instead of doing it gen…
…erically

This is needed to be able to create implementations for other pointer
types, e.g. boxed types, without creating overlapping implementations.
@EPashkin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@EPashkin

EPashkin Jul 13, 2017

Member

Checked all linked PRs and all works (only need update gir submodule).
My only worry was, that now we need add gobject_sys to dependence to each lib with object.
And I thought that better reexport g_value_dup_object, g_value_set_object and g_value_set_object in glib and use reexported in macros?
But this method will result reexport 3 boxed functions g_value_set_boxed too and maybe others,
so currently I prefer this PR as is.
@sdroege, @GuillaumeGomez, what you think?

Member

EPashkin commented Jul 13, 2017

Checked all linked PRs and all works (only need update gir submodule).
My only worry was, that now we need add gobject_sys to dependence to each lib with object.
And I thought that better reexport g_value_dup_object, g_value_set_object and g_value_set_object in glib and use reexported in macros?
But this method will result reexport 3 boxed functions g_value_set_boxed too and maybe others,
so currently I prefer this PR as is.
@sdroege, @GuillaumeGomez, what you think?

@sdroege

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@sdroege

sdroege Jul 13, 2017

Member

All PRs updated to also have the gir submodule updated.

About requiring gobject_sys, this was already required before for example whenever you had an object with properties. I don't think that's much of a problem really. (And yes, others too in a bit: g_value_set_enum, g_value_set_flags, etc)

Member

sdroege commented Jul 13, 2017

All PRs updated to also have the gir submodule updated.

About requiring gobject_sys, this was already required before for example whenever you had an object with properties. I don't think that's much of a problem really. (And yes, others too in a bit: g_value_set_enum, g_value_set_flags, etc)

@EPashkin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@EPashkin

EPashkin Jul 13, 2017

Member

Thanks, @sdroege
@GuillaumeGomez, I vote for merge this PR and all related regens.

Member

EPashkin commented Jul 13, 2017

Thanks, @sdroege
@GuillaumeGomez, I vote for merge this PR and all related regens.

@GuillaumeGomez

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@GuillaumeGomez

GuillaumeGomez Jul 13, 2017

Member

Thanks for all these PRs (took me a bit of time to read all this code ;) )!

Member

GuillaumeGomez commented Jul 13, 2017

Thanks for all these PRs (took me a bit of time to read all this code ;) )!

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez merged commit 2df0c1e into gtk-rs:master Jul 13, 2017

0 of 2 checks passed

continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build failed
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build failed
Details

@EPashkin EPashkin referenced this pull request Jul 13, 2017

Merged

Regen #8

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment