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 70227 - GtkTextBuffer::tag_table property shouldn't be construct-only
GtkTextBuffer::tag_table property shouldn't be construct-only
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: gtk+
Classification: Platform
Component: Widget: GtkTextView
1.3.x
Other All
: Normal enhancement
: Medium feature
Assigned To: gtk-bugs
gtk-bugs
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2002-02-01 00:16 UTC by Daniel Elstner
Modified: 2014-03-22 19:54 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: Unversioned Enhancement

Attachments
patch adding the ::tag_table property (5.23 KB, patch)
2002-02-01 00:30 UTC, Daniel Elstner 		committed Details | Review

Description Daniel Elstner 2002-02-01 00:16:02 UTC 
Currently there's no way for gtkmm (and maybe other language bindings) to
initialize a GtkTextBuffer with an already created GtkTextTagTable, like
gtk_text_buffer_new() does.

This could be solved by adding a construct-only property ::tag_table to the
GtkTextBuffer class.
Comment 1 Daniel Elstner 2002-02-01 00:30:19 UTC 
Created attachment 6571 [details] [review]
patch adding the ::tag_table property
Comment 2 Havoc Pennington 2002-02-01 04:28:47 UTC 
And aside from the property there should maybe be a 
gtk_text_buffer_set_tag_table(), there's no reason 
this should be construct-only.

Doh. Well, one for 2.2.
Comment 3 Owen Taylor 2002-09-23 21:48:40 UTC 
The patch looks basically OK, except that it would be 
better to do:

 g_object_new (GTK_TYPE_TEXT_BUFFER,
               "tag_table", table,
               NULL);

In the _new() function. (This prevents an extra call to
set_property for the tag_table property with table == NULL.)
Comment 4 Havoc Pennington 2002-09-23 22:27:03 UTC 
Looks fine to commit to me.
Comment 5 Daniel Elstner 2002-09-30 17:24:16 UTC 
Committed, with the change Owen suggested.

Havoc, you said there's no reason for this property to be
construct-only.  Thus I'm leaving the bug open for now, though
personally I don't care much about this.
Comment 6 Owen Taylor 2002-11-14 05:55:37 UTC 
Retitling.

It seems like a fair bit of work to make this property not
construct only if there are already tags in the buffer,
you'd have to remove them or something.
Comment 7 Matthias Clasen 2014-03-22 19:54:10 UTC 
closing out old bugs