Per Inge Mathisen schreef:
> On 5/21/07, Dennis Schridde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Actually it doesn't matter what they were before, since 2.1 is
>> incompatible anyway and will be a lot more if the netcode should be
>> rewritten.
>>
Well, the problem is that at that time I was not s
On 5/21/07, Dennis Schridde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But still I'd leave the BOOL in there (you could make it C99 bool though),
> since neither uint8_t nor uint32_t are really descriptive about the boolean
> meaning of their contents.
We need a boolean value that has a guaranteed known bit wid
Am Montag, 21. Mai 2007 schrieb Giel van Schijndel:
> Author: muggenhor
> Date: Mon May 21 00:55:12 2007
> New Revision: 1314
>
> URL: http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/warzone?rev=1314&view=rev
> Log:
> use (u)intX_t types for structs send accross the network (for the size
> guarantees)
>
> Modified:
>
