Re: [Gegl-developer] Review of public GEGL API

[Øyvind Kolås]

On 12/4/06, Martin Nordholts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> gegl_node_connect_to is much better. Why would we want to have two terms
> for the same thing? The code for it would be
>
> gboolean
> gegl_node_connect_to (GeglNode *self, const gchar *source_pad_name,
> GeglNode *sink, const gchar *sink_pad_name)
> {
>  return gegl_node_connect_from (sink, sink_pad_name, self,
> source_pad_name);
> }

2006-12-04  Øyvind Kolås  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

        Added a gegl_node_connect_to function as syntachtic sugar for
        gegl_node_connect_from. Since gegl_node_connect_to might lead
        to clearer code in some cases.

2006-12-04  Øyvind Kolås  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

        %s/gegl_node_connect/gegl_node_connect_from/

/Øyvind K.

-- 
«The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed»
                                                 -- William Gibson
http://pippin.gimp.org/                            http://ffii.org/
_______________________________________________
Gegl-developer mailing list
Gegl-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer