2009/3/4 Frédéric Gaudy :
> Hi,
>
> since vala 0.5.7, static function Gst.Message.type_get_name() does not exist
> in vapi file, but still in vala doc
> (http://valadoc.org/?pkg=gstreamer-0.10&element=Gst.Message)
>
> Is it a forgetting or an api change.
The API is slightly different, you can use
Hi,
since vala 0.5.7, static function Gst.Message.type_get_name() does not exist in
vapi file, but still in vala doc
(http://valadoc.org/?pkg=gstreamer-0.10&element=Gst.Message)
Is it a forgetting or an api change.
Thanks.
___
Vala-list mail
On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 13:50 +0100, pancake wrote:
> mmh, pid_t is not a struct, is an 'int', in which whay do you get
> the (int) value of this empty struct? I would rather prefer to do
> it in another way to allow vala use the 'int' nature of the pid_t type
> for conversions between numbers, strin
Am Mittwoch, den 04.03.2009, 13:50 +0100 schrieb pancake:
> mmh, pid_t is not a struct, is an 'int', in which whay do you get
> the (int) value of this empty struct? I would rather prefer to do
> it in another way to allow vala use the 'int' nature of the pid_t type
> for conversions between number
mmh, pid_t is not a struct, is an 'int', in which whay do you get
the (int) value of this empty struct? I would rather prefer to do
it in another way to allow vala use the 'int' nature of the pid_t type
for conversions between numbers, strings and process-id's.
Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote:
Hans
Hans Baier:
>Another try (attached).
>
>Works for me here.
ACK. Looks good to me.
Regards,
--
:M:
>From ea2b5b8f79fe15f862d556afffab55864a1507aa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Hans Baier
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 06:17:53 +0700
Subject: [PATCH] posix.vapi: Added kill and pid_t
---
vapi/posix.vapi
Am Mittwoch, den 04.03.2009, 09:14 +0100 schrieb pancake:
> Where's the SIGXXX enum? and signal()?
Already in the bindings.
--
:M:
___
Vala-list mailing list
Vala-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list
Am Dienstag, den 03.03.2009, 23:44 -0500 schrieb Michael B. Trausch:
> On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 23:21:28 +0100
> Michael 'Mickey' Lauer
> wrote:
>
> > I could imagine posix not wanting to depend on Glib though,
> > so I'd recommend using the native pid_t instead of Glib's variant
> > here.
>
> Am I m
Where's the SIGXXX enum? and signal()? They are 20loc patch and are
effortless to do,I don't see the point of pushing single function
bindings to the posix bindings.
About Glib.Pid and pid_t ..I would defend pid_t because is something
that depends on libc,not glib.at the end this is an "int
