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 554420 - Seal GtkTextTag
Seal GtkTextTag
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: gtk+
Classification: Platform
Component: Widget: GtkTextView
2.19.x
Other All
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: gtk-bugs
gtk-bugs
Depends on:
Blocks: 588339
 
 
Reported: 2008-09-30 12:30 UTC by Christian Dywan
Modified: 2011-02-04 16:12 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
Proposed patch (2.75 KB, patch)
2009-08-13 22:14 UTC, Cody Russell
none Details | Review
Updated patch (2.82 KB, patch)
2009-08-13 22:19 UTC, Cody Russell
committed Details | Review

Description Christian Dywan 2008-09-30 12:30:26 UTC
GtkTextTag still needs to be sealed, see http://live.gnome.org/GTK%2B/3.0/PendingSealings.
Comment 1 Owen Taylor 2009-08-13 16:40:26 UTC
No accessors are needed - GtkTextTag is a completely property-based API.
Comment 2 Cody Russell 2009-08-13 22:14:57 UTC
Created attachment 140710 [details] [review]
Proposed patch
Comment 3 Cody Russell 2009-08-13 22:19:31 UTC
Created attachment 140711 [details] [review]
Updated patch

Sorry, I missed one last time.
Comment 4 Cody Russell 2009-08-13 22:21:27 UTC
Also, not really sure if this is in the scope of this bug.. but should we also do #ifndef GSEAL_ENABLE / #endif around the definitions of GtkTextAppearance and GtkTextAttributes, and then move those definitions into the .c #ifdef GSEAL_ENABLE?
Comment 5 André Klapper 2009-09-23 14:34:09 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> Also, not really sure if this is in the scope of this bug.. but should we also
> do #ifndef GSEAL_ENABLE / #endif around the definitions of GtkTextAppearance
> and GtkTextAttributes, and then move those definitions into the .c #ifdef
> GSEAL_ENABLE?

Anybody who could comment/answer this, please?
Comment 6 Javier Jardón (IRC: jjardon) 2010-02-03 00:32:14 UTC
Review of attachment 140711 [details] [review]:

The patch looks good, waiting for maintainers aproval
Comment 7 Christian Dywan 2010-02-04 01:12:19 UTC
Comment on attachment 140711 [details] [review]
Updated patch

Looks correct to me.