After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 101959 - Add support for instance private structures
Add support for instance private structures
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: glib
Classification: Platform
Component: gobject
2.2.x
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: gtkdev
gtkdev
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2002-12-25 22:10 UTC by Owen Taylor
Modified: 2011-02-18 16:07 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Description Owen Taylor 2002-12-25 22:10:09 UTC 
It would be nice to have a way of storing private data in blocks
allocated after the public part of the instance structure.

See:

 http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2002-December/msg00147.html

For a detailed proposal and patch
Comment 1 Matthias Clasen 2003-01-02 23:29:48 UTC 
Move bugs which are tracking planned 2.4 features to the proper target
milestones.
Comment 2 Mark McLoughlin 2003-01-03 05:35:57 UTC 
Just so it doesn't get lost, see:

http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2003-January/msg00004.html

for a version of Owen's patch with some minor changes, namely

  1) add g_type_get_private_offset() and
  2) add some tests to testgobject for the private data (useful even   
     if the first part of the patch isn't accepted)
Comment 3 Owen Taylor 2003-03-10 16:43:44 UTC 
Committed.

Thu Feb 27 17:33:19 2003  Owen Taylor  <otaylor@redhat.com>
                                                                     
          
        * gtype.[ch] testgobject.c: Add support for instance-private data.
        g_type_class_add_private(), g_type_instance_get_private(),
        G_TYPE_INSTANCE_GET_PRIVATE(). (#101959, patch partly by
        Mark McLoughlin, extensive feedback from Tim Janik.)
Comment 4 Matthias Clasen 2003-03-19 21:50:18 UTC 
I guess there is no reason to keep this open, since it is already
committed...