Comments on: I want my GConf notifications http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/ Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one (Albert Einstein) Mon, 06 Oct 2008 21:44:59 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.11 by: Sergio http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/#comment-1027 Fri, 28 Sep 2007 16:36:20 +0000 http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/#comment-1027 Ken indeed, I am updating a bug about this issue to the GNOME bugzilla soon Ken indeed, I am updating a bug about this issue to the GNOME bugzilla soon

]]> by: ken http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/#comment-1026 Fri, 28 Sep 2007 16:01:07 +0000 http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/#comment-1026 I've written code using GConf before, and you're right: sadly, the documentation isn't entirely complete or accurate, to say the least. I took a different approach: instead of reading the GConf source code, I just tried things, and recorded what it did. Eventually I get everything to work fine. It would be nice if somebody went through the GConf source code and made sure all the docs were accurate and unambiguous. I’ve written code using GConf before, and you’re right: sadly, the documentation isn’t entirely complete or accurate, to say the least.

I took a different approach: instead of reading the GConf source code, I just tried things, and recorded what it did. Eventually I get everything to work fine.

It would be nice if somebody went through the GConf source code and made sure all the docs were accurate and unambiguous.

]]> by: Sergio http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/#comment-1016 Thu, 27 Sep 2007 14:55:08 +0000 http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/#comment-1016 I agree with you Havoc, that's why I posted about it, makes completely no sense for me. I agree with you Havoc, that’s why I posted about it, makes completely no sense for me.

]]> by: Havoc Pennington http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/#comment-1015 Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:43:24 +0000 http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/#comment-1015 I said that wrong - caching due to a get is good, suppressing notify due to a get is bad. I said that wrong - caching due to a get is good, suppressing notify due to a get is bad.

]]> by: Havoc Pennington http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/#comment-1014 Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:42:54 +0000 http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/#comment-1014 I think the ideal would be to avoid duplicate notifies but not suppress a notify if the item is only cached due to a get. There's no reason you would ever need a duplicate notify, but caching due to a get is surprising and wrong. I think the ideal would be to avoid duplicate notifies but not suppress a notify if the item is only cached due to a get. There’s no reason you would ever need a duplicate notify, but caching due to a get is surprising and wrong.

]]> by: Sergio http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/#comment-1012 Thu, 27 Sep 2007 09:46:31 +0000 http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/#comment-1012 Well, that's not a reason for me, because you can end up with an infinite loop with a lot of things, like emitting a signal in a handler for that signal. The API can not fix programming errors and the situation you're describing is a programming error. Well, that’s not a reason for me, because you can end up with an infinite loop with a lot of things, like emitting a signal in a handler for that signal. The API can not fix programming errors and the situation you’re describing is a programming error.

]]> by: lunke http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/#comment-1011 Thu, 27 Sep 2007 09:31:22 +0000 http://blogs.igalia.com/svillar/2007/09/27/i-want-my-gconf-notifications/#comment-1011 Im guessing gconf does that to avoid endless loops in bad programs. That is, your widget is set to the value from the notification, everytime your widget "changes" value it tells gconf to modify the related key. Et voila, you have an endless loop. Im guessing gconf does that to avoid endless loops in bad programs.
That is, your widget is set to the value from the notification, everytime your widget “changes” value it tells gconf to modify the related key. Et voila, you have an endless loop.

]]>