On Wed, 2010-05-19 at 19:18 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote: > 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.
Here it is, in case you change your mind: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=621532 -- [email protected] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com _______________________________________________ gnome-db-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-db-list
