Re: gboolean definition and size

Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com> writes:

  > Dan Nicolaescu <dann godzilla ICS UCI EDU> writes: 
  > > Is there any reason for gboolean to have a different size? 
  > IIRC it used to be a byte, but there were dozens of bugs introduced by
  > that, so we just gave up and made it an int.

So is it a good time now to revisit that decision? 
Or you don't think it's appropriate? 


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]