Well, to be honest, the g_ stuff serves as an abstraction layer; I don't think that currently there is any problem with using the plain C type instead of the g_ type in this (or other) functions, but for consistency's sake and for the case that this typedef will become more complex depending on other platforms supported in the future I would consider this a minor bug and opt to get it fixed.
2010/8/31 David Nečas <[email protected]> > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:49:26PM -0300, John Williams wrote: > > As the documentation > > ( > http://library.gnome.org/devel/glib/2.24/glib-String-Utility-Functions.html#g-strcmp0 > ) > > the g_strcmp0 requires const char instead const gchar and returns int > > instead gint. > > Does it matter with > > typedef char gchar; > typedef int gint; > > ? > > These types correspond exactly to the standard C types; they are defined > only for convenience (you can put g- before everything), see their > documentation. > > Yeti > > _______________________________________________ > gtk-list mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list > -- Please note that according to the German law on data retention, information on every electronic information exchange with me is retained for a period of six months. [Bitte beachten Sie, dass dem Gesetz zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung zufolge jeder elektronische Kontakt mit mir sechs Monate lang gespeichert wird.]
_______________________________________________ gtk-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
