On Wed 09 Mar 2016 at 22:42:26 +0100, Petr Kovar wrote:
> Thanks for all the info, Olaf! So this patch will do?
>
> --- /tmp/ezzIwP_body-pane.cc
> +++ /tmp/pan2/pan/gui/body-pane.cc
> @@ -1637,7 +1637,6 @@
>
> {
> gtk_container_remove (GTK_CONTAINER (_att_frame), _att_toolbar);
> - if (G_IS_OBJECT(_att_toolbar)) g_object_unref(_att_toolbar);
> (void)create_attachments_toolbar(_att_frame);
> }
> Yes, that should do it. Or even better would be - if (G_IS_OBJECT(_att_toolbar)) g_object_unref(_att_toolbar); + _att_toolbar = NULL; that would make it clearer if _att_toolbar is accidentally used later on. I have double-checked it, and I am basing my reasoning on this documentation: https://developer.gnome.org/gtk2/stable/GtkContainer.html The description for gtk_container_remove() mentions refcounts, but gtk_container_add() doesn't. gtk_table_new() doesn't mention refcounts either; I would have liked some reference to https://developer.gnome.org/gobject/unstable/gobject-The-Base-Object-Type.html#floating-ref or https://developer.gnome.org/gobject/unstable/gobject-memory.html#gobject-destruction-table (which took some clicking around to find). It seems that the general pattern is that gtk_table_new() would create a "floating reference" and gtk_container_add() would turn that into a normal reference. gtk_container_remove() would finally remove it, and because it is now zero the object gets deleted. (An alternative approach could be to add a refcount to _att_toolbar just after creating it, but I don't see any particular advantage to that at the moment.) Shall I look at some more of these, later on? (After the currently pending changes; I don't want to mix too many things at the same time.) -Olaf. -- ___ Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert -- The Doctor: No, 'eureka' is Greek for \X/ rhialto/at/xs4all.nl -- 'this bath is too hot.'
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Pan-users mailing list Pan-users@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pan-users
