If the user passes an explicit setter function when creating a
GProperty, we assume that a notify signal will be emitted. For direct
access to a structure field, we can emit an implicit notification
ourselves, since we know that if the value has changed.
This changes the signature of the explicit setter functions.
Do not implicitly grab the private data offset inside GProperty: we
allow passing any offset when creating a new GProperty, and let the
user decide where the property is stored, by giving us the correct
offset — either from the instance structure, or from the private
structure.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=648526
GProperty should store the default value (if any) of a property, as well
as the eventual overrides coming from the sub-classes of the class that
defined the property.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=648526
Dealing with GParamSpec is tedious and less efficient than necessary.
GParamSpec is a data type meant to be used to validate GValue, and only
incidentally provides us with the facilities to implement properties on
GObject. GObject itself requires us to provide accessors functions and
then call them from within a huge switch() inside two virtual functions.
Property definitions should be able to either directly access a struct
field or specify the accessors pair that control a property. On top of
that, most of the property and accessor definition can be autogenerated
from simple pre-processor directives.
So, here's to you GProperty.
GProperty is a GParamSpec sub-class that encapsulates all the C
fundamental types inside a single, opaque structure (to avoid leaking
out implementation details); a GProperty can access the structure member
holding the value of the property, or invoke the accessor functions
passed to its constructor. Type safety is enforced at compile time
through the C type system, and at run time through the GType system.
GProperty will try *very* hard to avoid boxing and unboxing fundamental
type values into GValues.
GObject will recognize whether a GParamSpec used to set or get a
property is really a GProperty, and thus will shortcircuit most of the
GValue-based marshalled code, preferring the direct C function and
direct argument collection instead of boxing/unboxing of GValues.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=648526
Otherwise we have to rely on pthread_cond_timedwait() actually using
the monotonic clock, which might be true or not. On Android at least
it is using the realtime clock, no pthread_condattr_setclock() is available
but instead pthread_cond_timedwait_monotonic() can be used.
When using the GLIB_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED macro to define the upper bound
of allowed API the G_DEFINE_TYPE_EXTENDED starts warning about the newly
added g_type_class_adjust_private_offset() function; this effectively
introduces a run-time dependency on GLib 2.38 even if we don't use its
API explicitly.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=703191
It's possible to get a org.freedesktop.Properties.GetAll call even if we
have no readable properties in the introspection, in which case we
should return the empty list in the usual way.
We should certainly _not_ be dispatching to the method call handler of
an interface which has no properties (since it will not be expecting
this).
Add a check to make sure that there is at least one readable property
before assuming that a NULL get_property handler implies that we want to
handle properties asynchronously.
Add a testcase that was failing before the change and works after it.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=703437
This reverts commits dfbac178bd and
56348210f3.
These two commits introduce undesirable behaviour and were made with no
apparent approval from anybody at all, and without reference to a bug or
mailing list discussion.
In order to fully undo the effects of g_mutex_init(),
it is necessary to reset the internal mutex pointer
back to NULL so that a later call to g_mutex_init()
actually works as expected.
Recent versions of clang have changed __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ to always
include the function signature (rather than including the function
signature in C++ but not in C like gcc does). This causes G_STRFUNC to
give different results under clang and gcc, causing some tests with
g_test_expect_messages() to fail.
Fix this by only using __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ in C++, and using
__FUNCTION__ in C. (Under gcc this change has no effect.)
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=702147
We don't use # or other forms of links in the section headings.
We also capitalize them and don't put a final period.
This commit corrects several headings to follow these rules.
When a child_source is added to a blocked source it has no context, yet we
call block_source on it that segfaults when it dereferences the NULL context
when it attempts to remove the file descriptors. To fix this we:
- Ensure that when we block a source, we don't attempt to remove its file
descriptors from a NULL context.
- Also ensure that when we attach a blocked source to a context, we don't add the
file descriptors to the context.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=701283
As it turns out, we have examples of internal functions called
type_name_get_private() in the wild (especially among older libraries),
so we need to use a name for the per-instance private data getter
function that hopefully won't conflict with anything.
Started off by using the new instance private data macro, ended up
cleaning up the obscure, out of date, or simply broken concepts and
paragraphs.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=700035
For static types, it should be possible to register a private data
structure right when we are registering the type, i.e. from the
get_type() implementation. By allowing this, we can take advantage of
the existing type definition macros to cut down the amount of code
necessary (as well as the knowledge baggage) when creating a new type.
The main issue with this new feature is that it cannot be mixed with the
old idiomatic way of adding private instance data by calling a function
in the middle of the class_init() implementation, as that imposes the
additional constraint of initializing the whole type hierarchy in order
to retrieve the offset of the private data in the GTypeInstance
allocation.
For this reason we are going to follow a two-step process; in the first
step, we are going to introduce the new (semi-private) API to register
the intent to add private instance data from within the get_type()
implementation, and hide it behind a macro; at the same time, the
G_DEFINE_TYPE_EXTENDED macro is going to be modified so that it will
register the private instance data if the macro was used, using a new
(semi-private) function as well. Once we have migrated all our code, we
will make the first new function perform the actual private data
registration, and turn the second new function into a no-op. This should
guarantee a transparent migration of existing code to the new idiomatic
form.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=700035
cd html && gtkdoc-mkhtml $mkhtml_options gio ../gio-docs.xml
../xml/gdbusconnection.xml:2063: parser error : Opening and ending tag mismatch: literal line 2062 and para
</para>
^
We do a bunch of new validity checks for return values in response to
calls on the D-Bus property API but we miss the 'goto out' in one case.
Add it.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=698375
Add some type checking for the values returned from async property
handling calls, similar in spirit to the type checking we do for normal
method calls.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=698375
The existing advice in the documentation to "simply" register the
"org.freedesktop.DBus.Properties" interface if you want to handle
properties asynchronously is pretty unreasonable. If you want to handle
this interface you have to deal with all properties for all interfaces
on the path, and you have to do all of the checking for yourself. You
also have to provide your own introspection data.
Introduce a new convention for dealing with properties asynchronously.
If the user provides NULL for their get_property() or set_property()
functions in the vtable and has properties registered then the
properties are sent to the method_call() handler. We get lucky here
that this function takes an "interface_name" parameter that we can set
to "org.freedesktop.DBus.Properties".
We also do the user the favour of setting the GDBusPropertyInfo on the
GDBusMethodInvocation for their convenience (for much the same reasons
as they might want the already-available GDBusMethodInfo).
Add a testcase as well as a bunch of documentation about this new
feature.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=698375
Separate the code for validating a method call from the code for
actually scheduling it for dispatch.
This will allow property Get/Set/GetAll calls to be dispatched to the
method_call handler without duplicating a lot of code.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=698375
