From: Duncan C. <dun...@wo...> - 2006-03-30 14:47:36
|
On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 15:31 +0100, Axel Simon wrote: > On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 15:04 +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote: > > Is there any reason for this change? It makes it a lot less convenient. > > I can't think of what the Nothing case would mean. > > > > If the user get's the attribute when the underlying glib property is > > NULL then newAttrFromStringProperty converts that to "" so there's > > nothing unsafe. > > Ok, I'm wrong here. I thought that "markup" was read/write which would > mean you have to have the ability to set the "text" to NULL so that the > markup attribute is used (if you wanted to switch between them). What > happens is that setting markup will set the text attribute and a private > markup-set flag. So yes, that can be changed back. Sorry about this. Ok, no probs. > > This is not type safe. Under the typed model + untyped view system we > > can't extract a model from a view. > > Ok, I probably meant UntypedTreeModelClass then?! There might be similar > issues in the other widgets. Maybe you did. Hmm, not sure. I don't think there's much useful you can do with an untyped tree model however. One can poke about in an untyped model but one can't attach it to a new view or get any data out of it. It'd be simpler to just prevent people from getting the model out of a view. That's what you did in one of the other views. Of course, with a typed view.... :-) > I can fix these this weekend. > > Sorry about my poking around, :-) not a problem! I'm reviewing, not complaining :-) Duncan |