> On June 9, 2014, 7:42 p.m., Andrew Stitcher wrote: > > But why do we care about this warning anyway? (we could just suppress it) > > > > I think the appropriate "solution", if we even need one, is to %ignore > > pn_atom_t. > > > > Allowing swig to wrap pn_atom_t doesn't make much sense in the first place > > and we have typemaps for the cases that this type is used in the API.
%ignore pn_atom_t it shall be, thanks. - Chug ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22387/#review45115 ----------------------------------------------------------- On June 9, 2014, 7:38 p.m., Chug Rolke wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/22387/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated June 9, 2014, 7:38 p.m.) > > > Review request for qpid, Andrew Stitcher and Rafael Schloming. > > > Bugs: PROTON-601 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-601 > > > Repository: qpid > > > Description > ------- > > The fix is to take the union out of the struct. > > > Diffs > ----- > > proton/trunk/proton-c/include/proton/codec.h 1600756 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/22387/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > passes ctest windows and linux > > > Thanks, > > Chug Rolke > >
