On Wed, 2010-05-19 at 18:06 +0200, Vivien Malerba wrote: > On 17 May 2010 15:34, Murray Cumming <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have some general thoughts about the IDs used with the GdaSqlBuilder > > functions: > > > > 1. > > I think we should have a GdaSqlBuilderID typedef. That will make things > > easier if this type is every more complex in some future API-breaking > > version of libgda. This would not break code that currently uses guint. > > I really don't envision other things than guint as they are only an > index into internal objects, so I don't think it's necessary.
Nevertheless, I think it makes the API clearer. I'll prepare a patch for you later and give you another chance to accept it. I know you might not. > Yes, you're right. Specifying an ID to be used (instead of letting the > sql builder object assign one) should be removed. If you have the time > to do it, that's better as I don't have much time at the moment to > work on this. Otherwise I'll do it ASAP. I'll do this first. I'm happy to have some way to help, after you've helped me so much. -- [email protected] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com _______________________________________________ gnome-db-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-db-list
