add chain up section

docs/reference/gobject/tut_howto.xml

@@ -592,30 +592,6 @@ maman_bar_class_init (MamanBarClass *klass)
         <para>
           Children can then implement the subclass with code such as:
 <programlisting>
-static void
-maman_bar_subtype_class_init (MamanBarSubTypeClass *klass)
-{
-    MamanBarClass *bar_class = MAMAN_BAR_CLASS (klass);
-    /* implement pure virtual class function. */
-    bar_class->do_specific_action_one = maman_bar_subtype_do_specific_action_one;
-}
-</programlisting>
-	</para>
-
-	<para>
-	  Finally, it is interesting to note that, just like in C++, it is possible
-	  to make each object class method chain to its parent class method:
-<programlisting>
-static void 
-maman_bar_real_do_action_two (MamanBar *self, /* parameters */)
-{
-    MamanBarClass *bar_class = g_type_class_peek_parent (klass);
-    /* chain up */
-    bar_class->do_action (self, /* parameters */);
-
-    /* do local stuff here. */
-}
-
 static void
 maman_bar_subtype_class_init (MamanBarSubTypeClass *klass)
 {
@@ -631,14 +607,68 @@ maman_bar_subtype_class_init (MamanBarSubTypeClass *klass)
     <sect2 id="howto-gobject-chainup">
      <title>Chaining up</title>
 
-     <p>Chaining up is commonly used to implement the Chain Of Responsability pattern in C++: each class in a
+     <para>Chaining up is often loosely defined by the folowing set of conditions:
-     given inheritance hierarchy is expected to override the same method and then call from within each method
+       <itemizedlist>
-     the overriden method of the parent. Personally, I am not sure this is a very smart idea (a detailed explanation
+         <listitem><para>Parent class A defines a public virtual method named <function>foo</function> and 
-     of why I think it is a bad idea would take too much space for this document) but I can show you how to do it and
+         provides a default implementation.</para></listitem>
-     here is an example.
+         <listitem><para>Child class B re-implements method <function>foo</function>.</para></listitem>
-     </p>
+         <listitem><para>In the method B::foo, the child class B calls its parent class method A::foo.</para></listitem>
+       </itemizedlist>
+       There are many uses to this idiom:
+       <itemizedlist>
+         <listitem><para>You need to change the behaviour of a class without modifying its code. You create
+           a subclass to inherit its implementation, re-implement a public virtual method to modify the behaviour
+           slightly and chain up to ensure that the previous behaviour is not really modifed, just extended.
+           </para></listitem>
+         <listitem><para>You are lazy, you have access to the source code of the parent class but you don't want 
+           to modify it to add method calls to new specialized method calls: it is faster to hack the child class
+           to chain up than to modify the parent to call down.</para></listitem>
+         <listitem><para>You need to implement the Chain Of Responsability pattern: each object of the inheritance
+           tree chains up to its parent (typically, at the begining or the end of the method) to ensure that
+           they each handler is run in turn.</para></listitem>
+       </itemizedlist>
+       I am personally not really convinced any of the last two uses are really a good idea but since this
+       programming idiom is often used, this section attemps to explain how to implement it.
+     </para>
 
-     <p>To invoke the parent method XXX</p>
+     <para>To explicitely chain up to the implementation of the virtual method in the parent class, 
+       you first need a handle to the original parent class structure. This pointer can then be used to 
+       access the original class function pointer and invoke it directly.
+        <footnote>
+          <para>The <emphasis>original</emphasis> adjective used in this sentence is not innocuous. To fully 
+           understand its meaning, you need to recall how class structures are initialized: for each object type,
+           the class structure associated to this object is created by first copying the class structure of its 
+           parent type (a simple <function>memcpy</function>) and then by invoking the class_init callback on 
+           the resulting class structure. Since the class_init callback is responsible for overwriting the class structure
+           with the user re-implementations of the class methods, we cannot merely use the modified copy of the parent class
+           structure stored in our derived instance. We want to get a copy of the class structure of an instance of the parent 
+           class.
+          </para>
+        </footnote>
+     </para>
+
+     <para>The function <function>g_type_class_peek_parent</function> is used to access the original parent 
+      class structure. Its input is a pointer to the class of the derived object and it returns a pointer
+      to the original parent class structure. The code below shows how you could use it:
+<programlisting>
+static void
+b_method_to_call (B *obj, int a)
+{
+  BClass *klass;
+  AClass *parent_class;
+  klass = B_GET_CLASS (obj);
+  parent_class = g_type_class_peek_parent (klass);
+
+  /* do stuff before chain up */
+  parent_class->method_to_call (obj, a);
+  /* do stuff after chain up */
+}
+</programlisting>
+     A lot of people who use this idiom in GTK+ store the parent class structure pointer in a global static 
+     variable to avoid the costly call to <function>g_type_class_peek_parent</function> for each function call.
+     Typically, the class_init callback initializes the global static variable. <filename>gtk/gtkhscale.c</filename>
+     does this.
+    </para>
 
     </sect2>
 
@@ -695,7 +725,7 @@ GType maman_ibaz_get_type (void);
 
 void maman_ibaz_do_action (MamanIbaz *self);
 
-#endif //MAMAN_IBAZ_H
+#endif /*MAMAN_IBAZ_H*/
 </programlisting>
       This code is almost exactly similar to the code for a normal <type>GType</type>
       which derives from a <type>GObject</type> except for a few details: