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cleaning up the obscure, out of date, or simply broken concepts and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
We presently do a lot of checks on property sets (signature check,
correct interface, property exists, etc.) from the worker thread before
dispatching the call to the user's thread. The typecheck, however, is
saved until just before calling the user's vfunc, in their thread.
My best guess is that this was done to save having to unpack the value
from the tuple twice (since we don't unpack it until we're just about
the call the user).
This patch moves the check to the same place as all of the other checks.
The purpose of this change is to allow for sharing this check with the
(soon-to-be-introduced) case of handing property sets from
method_call().
This change has a minor side effect: error messages generated by sending
invalid values to property sets are no longer guaranteed to be correctly
ordered with respect to the void returns from successful property sets.
They will instead be correctly ordered with respect to the other error
messages.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=698375
0192c59937 moved this file from EXTRA_DIST TO
BUILT_EXTRA_DIST for an unknown reason.
Having it here causes the timestamp to be updated during 'make dist' to
something newer than docs/reference/*/Makefile.in. This is a problem
because those Makefile.in are generated by including gtk-doc.make, so
automake becomes convinced that they need to be regenerated. This is a
problem for people who don't have automake installed, or have the wrong
version.
The timestamp problem has been around for quite a while, but it only
became a problem recently after automake changed policy about this in
commit a22717dffe37f30ef2ad2c355b68c9b3b5e4b8c7.
Specifically:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=700350
We didn't actually do any real-world testing of this, and
unsurprisingly it turns out to break in at least one widely-used
configuration (Fedora 19 x86_64, ext4 on LVM).
This reverts commit 9d0c17b501.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=701560
Build and "install" the gio-querymodules and gdbus utility programs so that
the Visual Studio builds of GLib is more comprehensive. The Python scripts
for the GDBus codegen will be added to "installation" later.
The automatic memory management of GBinding is not optimal for high
order languages with garbage collectors semantics. If we leave the
binding instance inert but still referenced it will be leaked, so one
solution that does not throw away the baby of C convenience with the
bathwater of language bindability is to have unbind() perform an
implicit unref().
Hopefully, C developers will read the documentation and especially the
note that says that after calling unbind() the reference count on the
GBinding instance is decreased.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=698018
We have turned up enough cases of this being done (including GTK API
allowing apps to do this to GtkSettings well after it has been
instantiated) that it is clear that we cannot really break this feature
while claiming to be backwards compatible.
For that reason, it becomes a warning rather than a critical (ie: it is
still well-defined behaviour, but you are discouraged from doing it).
The intention is to keep this feature for at least the next while.
A given GObjectClass will be able to avoid using GParamSpec pool for as
long as you don't install properties after init. If you do that, you
will get a warning and we will devolve to using GParamSpecPool.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=698614
