More Cruft for deletion

[Geert Janssens]

On maandag 14 november 2011, John Ralls wrote:
> On Nov 13, 2011, at 5:04 PM, John Ralls wrote:
> > With a generous dose of grep and some perl, I've compiled some lists of
> > unused functions. I've commented them out in the code and gotten a
> > successful "make check". The one thing I can't do is know what's part of
> > somebody's work-in-progress. I don't think any of these functions are
> > new, but please look through the lists and let me know if I shouldn't
> > remove any of them.
> > 
> > (In case you're wondering about the motivation: If it isn't there, it
> > doesn't need to be tested. There's quite enough to test without testing
> > things that aren't used.)
> 
> Dang it, forgot the attachments. Here they are.
> 
> Regards,
> John Ralls

Other than in scheme, some functions are callback funtions that are connected 
to dialogs and widgets via glade files (in the glade and gtkbuilder 
subdirectories).

This is for sure the case for all the gppat_filter_* and gppot_filter_* 
functions. So those shouldn't be removed.

Other than that, in gnc-tree-view-owner.c, the following functions are part of 
unfinished work and should be kept:
gnc_tree_view_owner_get_view_info
gnc_tree_view_owner_set_view_info
gnc_tree_view_owner_get_cursor_owner

In the engine, I'd keep
gncOwnerCommitEdit
because it is part of a set of 3 functions:
gncOwnerBeginEdit
gncOwnerCommitEdit
gncOwnerDestroy
Of which two are used currently.

The other functions have no particular importance to me although some of them 
may look useful.

Geert