Re: gboolean definition and size

[Jonathan Blandford <jrb redhat com>]

Dan Nicolaescu <dann godzilla ICS UCI EDU> writes:

> 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? 

To be honest, I don't think anyone sees any value in making a
developer-invisible change for minimal gain that could possibly break a
lot of code -- especially this close to a freeze.

Thanks,
-Jonathan