Colin Finck wrote: > Even though we all like to see a full MSVC build in the future, does > this really justify such an even bigger hack on top of the existing > ones?
In what way is it an even bigger hack? It merely changes the use of long back to how WIDL defines it in its prototypes for the scope of the block. > Would a proper fix really require that much more time? It depends on what your idea of a proper fix is. If you're referring to fixing it by removing __ROS_LONG64__, then that's not a proper fix either. WIDL needs to be fixed to stop outputting 'LONG' types when 'long' is used in the interface file. I don't have the time to fix widl, then any code which relied on the broken output. You're more than welcome to either revert it or fix it yourself. Ged. _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
