Studio: avoid lambda functions for signal callbacks #2294
Merged
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Specially important for WorkArea queuing rendering.
Reasoning by Kjell Ahlstedt (gtkmm maintainer) follows below:
From the documentation of sigc::mem_fun():
In most examples in the gtkmm tutorial the signal handlers are members of widgets.
All widgets inherit from sigc::trackable. The automatic disconnection when a
widget is destroyed would be lost if a sigc::mem_fun() is replaced by a C++ lambda
expression. Unless it's combined with sigc::track_obj():
but that's no better than sigc::mem_fun(), is it?
This kind of automatic disconnection is not always necessary. Some instances of
mem_fun() could be replaced by lambda expressions, to show that it's possible.
Preferably together with a description of the pros and cons of mem_fun() and
lambda expressions. But I don't recommend replacing the majority of the mem_fun()s.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtkmm-documentation/-/issues/10