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 138576 - gtk.IconSet now has 2 constructors in gtk.defs, while only gtk_icon_set_new_from_pixbuf should be in this role
gtk.IconSet now has 2 constructors in gtk.defs, while only gtk_icon_set_new_...
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: pygtk
Classification: Bindings
Component: gtk
Git Master
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Scott Tsai
Python bindings maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2004-03-31 02:03 UTC by Scott Tsai
Modified: 2004-12-22 21:47 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---

Attachments
patch for gtk.IconSet contructor (434 bytes, patch)
2004-03-31 02:09 UTC, Scott Tsai 		none Details | Review

Description Scott Tsai 2004-03-31 02:03:41 UTC 
Currently in CVS HEAD, gtk_icon_set_new and gtk_icon_set_new_from_pixbuf are
both marked as contructors of gtk.IconSet in gtk/gtk.defs, causing
gtk_icon_set_new to be set to the tp_init field of gtk.IconSet. This makes
"gtk.IconSet(pixbuf)" fail with TypeError, while it was accepted in earlier
versions of pygtk.

The gtk.IconSet contructor should be implemented by
_wrap_gtk_icon_set_new_from_pixbuf() in gtk/gtk.override, as it accepts the
optional pixbuf argument covering both the no argument and new_from_pixbuf use
cases.
gtk_icon_set_new was marked as a constructor of gtk.IconSet in gtk.defs revision
1.140 -> 1.141 by xordoquy along with many gtk2.4 api additions.

Attached patch to only mark gtk_icon_set_new_from_pixbuf as contructor.(A long
winded bug report for a one line patch, I know ...).
Comment 1 Scott Tsai 2004-03-31 02:09:00 UTC 
Created attachment 26130 [details] [review]
patch for gtk.IconSet contructor
Comment 2 Christian Reis (not reading bugmail) 2004-04-02 00:35:22 UTC 
Xavier, is this sort of regression `normal', or should we put some sort of
verification in the defs generator scripts?
Comment 3 Johan (not receiving bugmail) Dahlin 2004-04-04 13:01:23 UTC 
Fixed in CVS.