Re: [Geany-devel] Breaks not fixes : SF.net SVN: geany:[5971] trunk/src/socket.c

2011-09-30 Thread Nick Treleaven
On 30/09/2011 02:32, Lex Trotman wrote: Modified: trunk/src/socket.c === --- trunk/src/socket.c 2011-09-29 17:16:58 UTC (rev 5970) +++ trunk/src/socket.c 2011-09-29 17:49:42 UTC (rev 5971) @@ -588,7 +588,7 @@ gint fd,

Re: [Geany-devel] Breaks not fixes : SF.net SVN: geany:[5971] trunk/src/socket.c

2011-09-30 Thread Lex Trotman
[...] I misunderstood a note on the linux manpage for accept, thinking int is the proper type. It's one of Linus's famous rants, the original BSD accept() parameter was int then the standards committee made it size_t but when it was pointed out that this was a different size on some systems the

[Geany-devel] CTags with GRegex - Re: editing big files can be too slow with tag reparsing

2011-09-30 Thread Nick Treleaven
On 27/09/2011 13:17, Nick Treleaven wrote: On 26/09/2011 23:00, Colomban Wendling wrote: Le 26/09/2011 13:48, Nick Treleaven a écrit : I'm reduced to using Windows. I guess the reason is the regex code that is really old which is used for Windows builds. Maybe we could use GRegex now we have

Re: [Geany-devel] CTags with GRegex - Re: editing big files can be too slow with tag reparsing

2011-09-30 Thread Nick Treleaven
On 30/09/2011 14:37, Nick Treleaven wrote: On 27/09/2011 13:17, Nick Treleaven wrote: On 26/09/2011 23:00, Colomban Wendling wrote: Le 26/09/2011 13:48, Nick Treleaven a écrit : I'm reduced to using Windows. I guess the reason is the regex code that is really old which is used for Windows

Re: [Geany-devel] How about calling the next release 1.0?

2011-09-30 Thread Enrico Tröger
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 23:24:55 +0200, Colomban wrote: Le 22/09/2011 23:00, Enrico Tröger a écrit : On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 15:28:21 +0200, Colomban wrote: Le 20/09/2011 23:26, Enrico Tröger a écrit : On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:10:34 +0300, Yura wrote: Hi But why only 1.0? GNOME 3.* KDE 4.*

Re: [Geany-devel] How about calling the next release 1.0?

2011-09-30 Thread Jiří Techet
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 23:59, Colomban Wendling lists@herbesfolles.org wrote: Le 20/09/2011 12:07, Jiří Techet a écrit : Hi, Hey, just one very quick and possibly stupid idea. How about getting rid of the 0 version prefix and calling the next release 1.0? This would be just numbering