Re: [java-gnome-hackers] GTK, DisplayManager and multihead X

[Andrew C. <an...@op...>]

Hey Stefan,

On Sun, 2008-05-18 at 14:25 +0200, Stefan Prelle wrote:
> 1. When requesting a list of displays from the DisplayManager
>    I got the message that there is no mapping for 'GdkDisplayX11'

The workaround is the same as for GdkScreenX11; see
org.gnome.gdk.Plumbing and add a registerType() call there for the case
you're running up against.

In the medium term, I'm not in a huge rush to see this class of problem
go away. An error that results from us not having coverage of something
means that someone should probably write coverage of it if they need it.
Certainly this has driven a lot of activity to date.

        (oh, you want a signal that uses something called
        GtkMovementStep that has no constants registered for it yet?
        Hey! Guess what? Maybe it's time you researched it and wrote up
        some coverage for it. I dealt with that one today)

Over all, the real issue is preserving strong typedness. This applies
both to the "what do I do if I don't have a concrete subtype for this
yet" and also applies to plugins. If we know a give type of capability
will be built in or is likely to be built in, then create a concrete
subclass for it already. org.freedesktop.cairo.Surface and
org.gnome.gdk.PixbufFormat come to mind.

Anyway, yes, long term we'll want to "do" something about the case where
an instance shows up that we don't have a concrete Proxy type for. It's
not really that clear to me what shape that should take.

Vreixo suggested something like "UnknownSurface" and what not. That
might work, but I'm not really in a rush to create an Unknown concrete
subclass of bloody everything, especially when roughly the same effort
would just see the necessary public coverage added. I'd rather just see
the bindings improve when people need them to.

AfC
Sydney