Am Donnerstag, 29. Oktober 2009 23:24 schrieb Matt Lavin: > I've attached a new version of the patch that fixes my compile errors > and should keep the same function as before. I don't know why the > compiler likes my new version better, but it does.
I've seen similar changes which make the compiler happy, so this is just fine. Thanks a lot! I've added a const and changed the temporary variable name, but otherwise I committed your patch unchangedly. Thank you very much. Regards, Christian > > On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 18:54 -0400, Phil Longstaff wrote: > > On October 26, 2009 04:43:18 pm Matt Lavin wrote: > > > The first patch's main content was: > > > > > > - return (*((guint *) guid->data)); > > > + return guid->data[0]; > > > > > > That was the real compile error. I removed the two static functions > > > because they were functional duplicates of existing code and I thought > > > it would be better to reduce code duplication than to fix the same > > > compiler error in two spots. Of course, I didn't explain that and I > > > should have. The duplicate methods could be added back if they are > > > needed for a reason I overlooked. > > > > Won't that change the return value. Old value: contents of the first 4 > > bytes of data. New value: contents of the first 1 byte. > > > > Phil > > _______________________________________________ > > gnucash-devel mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
