2013-12-04 12:43, Murray Cumming skrev:
On Di, 2013-12-03 at 16:12 +0100, Kjell Ahlstedt wrote:
For the time being I've made some temporary fixes locally but I'd
suggest that the devs for atkmm, giomm and gdkmm should get together
and devise a common strategy so that MSVC builds will link corre
On Di, 2013-12-03 at 16:12 +0100, Kjell Ahlstedt wrote:
> For the time being I've made some temporary fixes locally but I'd
> suggest that the devs for atkmm, giomm and gdkmm should get together
> and devise a common strategy so that MSVC builds will link correctly.
> Right at the top of 'glibmmcon
John Emmas wrote:
> I've no idea why my posts are all getting returned all of a sudden but
> it seems like some kind of technical issue.
If he can send me (not the list) any error message then I can
investigate.
--
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com
__
I post this message on behalf of John Emmas. Hope I can get it through
to the gtkmm-list.
Kjell
Ursprungligt meddelande
Ämne: Fwd: Re: Gtk::SpinButton crash
Datum: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 09:52:40 +
Från: John Emmas
Till: Kjell Ahlstedt
Hi Kjell,
After several days
2013-11-29 18:13, John Emmas skrev:
On 29/11/2013 16:29, Kjell Ahlstedt wrote:
It would be fine if you could try to find out what goes wrong when
g_object_steal_qdata() is called. Why isn't the GQuark removed from
the list of the GtkAdjustment's quarks?
Yes you're onto something Kjell.
2013-11-29 13:15, John Emmas skrev:
On 28/11/2013 11:33, John Emmas wrote:
Thanks Kjell, I'm busy with another project today but first thing
tomorrow, I'll step through the destruction process and see if my
function sequence matches yours.
Today I've been looking into the 2nd stage of Kjel
On 28/11/2013 11:33, John Emmas wrote:
Thanks Kjell, I'm busy with another project today but first thing
tomorrow, I'll step through the destruction process and see if my
function sequence matches yours.
Today I've been looking into the 2nd stage of Kjell's destruction
process, namely:-
O
Hi Kjell, I've taken a very quick look into the first stage that you
described (delete some_adjuster):-
On 28/11/2013 09:54, Kjell Ahlstedt wrote:
This is what shall happen, and what does happen when I run the test:
_delete some_adjuster;_
Gtk::Object::~Object() calls Gtk::Object::_destroy_c_
Thanks Kjell, I'm busy with another project today but first thing
tomorrow, I'll step through the destruction process and see if my
function sequence matches yours.
John
___
gtkmm-list mailing list
gtkmm-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/l
2013-11-28 05:11, John Emmas skrev:
On 27 Nov 2013, at 09:24, Murray Cumming wrote:
I don't see any quark/object-data tests in glib/tests, and I guess there
should be one, but maybe the existing tests would show some base
problem.
That seems like a good idea and worth pursuing but perhaps I
On 27 Nov 2013, at 09:24, Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> I don't see any quark/object-data tests in glib/tests, and I guess there
> should be one, but maybe the existing tests would show some base
> problem.
>
That seems like a good idea and worth pursuing but perhaps I should emphasise
that my imp
On 27/11/2013 09:24, Murray Cumming wrote:
Does glib's test suite pass 100% for you? For instance, try "make check"
in glib.
Actually, that's not an easy question to answer... :-(
As far as the vcproj files are concerned the only two test modules (to
get included in them) are 'tests/testgli
Does glib's test suite pass 100% for you? For instance, try "make check"
in glib.
I don't see any quark/object-data tests in glib/tests, and I guess there
should be one, but maybe the existing tests would show some base
problem.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus
2013-11-25 22:05, John Emmas skrev:
Hi Kjell,
Many thanks for sending me your versions of those files. The good
news is that with only the exception of some commented sections, your
versions are identical to mine. Both versions exhibit the same
behaviour (and unfortunately, the same proble
On 25 Nov 2013, at 21:22, Ian Martin wrote:
> Hi John,
> Hope you don't mind me jumping in. I'm curious why you want to do your own
> memory management: Gtk::manage takes all the work out of your hands safely,
> and stops you deleting widgets in an inappropriate order
>
Hi Ian,
No, I don't
Hi John,
Hope you don't mind me jumping in. I'm curious why you want to do your
own memory management: Gtk::manage takes all the work out of your hands
safely, and stops you deleting widgets in an inappropriate order. If
you want to make a program that you have to do all your memory
managem
Hi Kjell,
Many thanks for sending me your versions of those files. The good news
is that with only the exception of some commented sections, your
versions are identical to mine. Both versions exhibit the same
behaviour (and unfortunately, the same problems).
I'm wondering now if I've been
2013-11-24 18:44, John Emmas skrev:
On 23/11/2013 10:23, John Emmas wrote:
It would be very interesting if you could apply those patches and see
if they change the calling order for you (like they did for me).
Hi Kjell, I've just had a new idea (a variation on the above theme).
When you
On 23/11/2013 10:23, John Emmas wrote:
It would be very interesting if you could apply those patches and see
if they change the calling order for you (like they did for me).
Hi Kjell, I've just had a new idea (a variation on the above theme).
When you can find some time, could you apply th
On 22/11/2013 19:17, Kjell Ahlstedt wrote:
2013-11-22 18:45, John Emmas skrev:
This crashes:-
Gtk::SpinButton some_spin_button;
Gtk::Adjustment some_adjuster (2, 0, 100, 1, 10, 0);
some_spin_button.set_adjustment (some_adjuster);
That's what I have now once again tested
2013-11-22 18:45, John Emmas skrev:
This crashes:-
Gtk::SpinButton some_spin_button;
Gtk::Adjustment some_adjuster (2, 0, 100, 1, 10, 0);
some_spin_button.set_adjustment (some_adjuster);
That's what I have now once again tested with 2.24.4 without extra
patches. No cras
Hi Kjell - we're back here again... :-(
On 22/11/2013 15:58, Kjell Ahlstedt wrote:
What's going on in your system? I get a feeling that the patches
you've applied to your copy of gtkmm 2.24.4 only hide the symptoms of
a different bug than the one those patches fixed in gtkmm 3.
I must admit
2013-11-22 14:57, John Emmas skrev:
Gtk::SpinButton some_spin_button;
Gtk::Adjustment some_adjuster (2, 0, 100, 1, 10, 0);
some_spin_button.set_adjustment (some_adjuster);
If I include the above lines in any gtkmm app (and build with MSVC)
the app eventually crashes at the stag
23 matches
Mail list logo
