Re: Patch For Approval

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

Federico Mena Quintero <federico ximian com> writes:

> Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com> writes:
> 
> > But it would be binary incompatible to change the value of
> > G_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, so that won't happen, so there's no issue.
> > 
> > I mean, I don't really care if you apply the patch, I'm just saying I
> > can't imagine it makes any difference. ;-)
> 
> The problem is that if I am reading the code I will see a zero.  Then
> I have to go to the header file to find the prototype for that
> function.  Then I have to figure out what a priority of zero means, by
> looking at other code or trying to see if there are some constants.
> 
> Replacing it with G_PRIORITY_DEFAULT means I will see that
> 
> 	a) the parameter specifies a priority
> 
> 	b) it is indeed the default priority
> 
> by just glancing at the code.  I don't have to look at header files or
> other code then, and it is obvious what it does.

Federico,

In the HEAD branch, it appears as G_PRIORITY_DEFAULT in the code.

I don't know why you would read the code for gmain.c in the glib-1-2
branch...

In your own code, feel free to G_PRIORITY_DEFAULT. In fact, please
use G_PRIORITY_DEFAULT.

Regards,
                                        Owen