Dear Werner, OK, I will insert casts and comments for initial fix of Win64. I will discuss the naming convention after fixing all -Wconversion messages for further clarification. It seems that the naming conventions for the variables in ftcalc should be considered carefully.
Regards, mpsuzuki Werner LEMBERG wrote: >> In such case, I want to write as: >> >> ft_internal_function(unsigned long ularg) >> [...] >> >> FT_Function(long int slarg) >> [...] > > Please no. I don't like having the `ul' and `sl' prefixes or > something similar to indicate the type of the variable. However, I > fully agree that variables should be named differently in such > situations to avoid confusion. > > Maybe using a generic `arg' for FT_Function, and, say, `idx' for > ft_internal_function? Or maybe use `idx_arg' or `raw_idx' in > FT_Function. > > Be generous in renaming (internal) stuff to the better, as long as the > variable names don't become too long! Of course, comments always > help... As a general rule, I immediately add a comment to the source > code if my interpretation is wrong after having just a quick look. I > encourage you to do the same (and we don't need ChangeLog entries for > source code comments). > > > Werner _______________________________________________ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
