On Tue, 2009-12-22 at 10:39 -0600, Jonathon Jongsma wrote:
On Tue, 2009-12-22 at 17:22 +0100, Krzesimir Nowak wrote:
On Tue, 2009-12-22 at 15:58 +0100, Glus Xof wrote:
2009/12/22 Krzesimir Nowak qdl...@gmail.com:
For sockets - use GSocket. But C++ wrapper of GSocket just hit the
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 15:39 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
Speaking of which: I would really appreciate people trying it out,
testing, and/or helping finish it. My time has been rather short
lately.
In particular, there is one example program using Gio::Resolver checked
into git
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 08:56 -0600, Jonathon Jongsma wrote:
Oh, I forgot to follow up about this problem. I have fixed this
particular issue (it was a function that wasn't returning a ref on an
object and we forgot to take an extra ref). There are still a few
methods here and there that need
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 16:11 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 08:56 -0600, Jonathon Jongsma wrote:
Oh, I forgot to follow up about this problem. I have fixed this
particular issue (it was a function that wasn't returning a ref on an
object and we forgot to take an extra
2010/1/29 Jonathon Jongsma jonat...@quotidian.org:
But nearly every function in gio has an overload for when
exceptions are disabled, so...
Maybe glibmm 3.0 should just require exceptions and remove the
no-exception mode? Is the exception handling overhead large enough to
warrant maintaining
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 20:08 +0100, Krzysztof Kosiński wrote:
2010/1/29 Jonathon Jongsma jonat...@quotidian.org:
But nearly every function in gio has an overload for when
exceptions are disabled, so...
Maybe glibmm 3.0 should just require exceptions and remove the
no-exception mode? Is the
