On 03/08/2010 12:26 PM, Iván Briano (Sachiel) wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Christopher Michael > <cpmicha...@comcast.net> wrote: >> On 03/08/2010 12:05 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Iván Briano (Sachiel) >>> <sachi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Christopher Michael >>>> <cpmicha...@comcast.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 03/08/2010 07:50 AM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:36 AM, Enlightenment SVN >>>>>> <no-re...@enlightenment.org> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Log: >>>>>>> Add macros (actually defines like hint_fill_set) for expand_set to >>>>>>> make it easier for people to know that weight_set handles expansion. >>>>>>> >>>>>> ouch! these macros will make it more error-prone and confusing, not >>>>>> less. Expand would be boolean, but we get double values... meaning? >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd rather add static inline functions that would check and convert >>>>>> parameters. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> How are they going to make it more error prone ? They are exactly like >>>>> the fill_set macros ? By your boolean logic there, wouldn't that apply >>>>> to fill_set also ? >>>>> >>>> >>>> I'd say yes. If we make one inline and converting as needed, so >>>> should we do with the other. >>> >>> sure, both of them. fill_set(o, bool, bool), fill_get(o, bool*, bool*) >>> >> >> I still fail to see how my macros make it any more error prone than the >> existing fill_set macros (that apparently noone complained about until >> this)...and if anything, it's less confusing for new people >> imo...fill/expand is much more common (and less confusing) than weight/align >> in this context. >> > > The macros don't make it error prone, Ahh ok :) I was under the impression that MY macros somehow made it more error prone..
the point is that both > expand and fill are really boolean, just using the weight and align > functions, Agreed. which take a wider range of values, so using fill_set(1, 1) > wouldn't fill anything, because it's passing the value straight to > align. Having them as functions converting, you just use true/false > values and have it pass to weight/align with the right value for each. > Yea, that makes sense. Thanks for clearing up :) dh >> dh >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
