|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
To: gtk-list@redhat.com
From: Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.ping.de>
Date: 27 Aug 1997 11:54:52 +0200
In-Reply-To: Maurizio Vitale's message of 27 Aug 1997 08:04:30 +0200
Resent-From: gtk-list@redhat.com
Reply-To: gtk-list@redhat.com
Maurizio Vitale <Maurizio.Vitale@esat.kuleuven.ac.be> writes:
>
> > > Making those symbols part of a gtk module (or prefixed by gtk:) would
> > > help alleviating the name pollution problem.
> >
> > Gtk already has to keep the namespace clean, so that wouldn't be a
> > problem in Scheme, I think.
>
> What I meant was that if you've somewhere something to the effect of
> (define toplevel GTK_TOPLEVEL) then the user cannot bind anything else
> to toplevel, while if you seize all identifiers starting with gtk: for
> your interface you've much less problems.
The enumeration values would have their usual Gtk names, I think.
Like GTK_WINDOW_TOPLEVEL, GTK_WINDOW_DIALOG. So we would have code
to effect of
(define GTK_WINDOW_TOPLEVEL 0)
(define GTK_WINDOW_DIALOG 1)
Or maybe with dashes in place of the underscores.
--
To unsubscribe: mail -s unsubscribe gtk-list-request@redhat.com < /dev/null
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |