Re: [gtk-list] Re: More about types...
- From: Drazen Kacar <dave srce hr>
- To: gtk-list redhat com
- Subject: Re: [gtk-list] Re: More about types...
- Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 05:24:47 +0100
Havoc Pennington wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Mar 1999, Drazen Kacar wrote:
> > Neither of them helps a lot, but with printf it would be something
> > like this:
> If you know the answer why did you ask? :-) g_print() would require the
> same conditional.
Because I know how to use printf, but I don't know how to use g_print.
Since there is no man page yet, I thought it would be best to ask.
> > Since GTK has all those gints, gpointers and such, it would be really
> > nice if there was gsize_t, goff_t & co. which would eliminate the
> > need for #ifdefs and different macros.
> There's a gsize and gssize (signed and unsigned). I don't think there's an
I didn't know that. See? It's best to ask first. But, but, but...
gsize is typedefed to guint32. And that one is "unsigned int" vulgaris
domesticas. As far as I can tell, gsize is only used in declaration
of g_date_strftime() and it can definitely not be used as a replacement
> > So, is there something like that? If not, which gtype is guaranteed to
> > hold size_t and off_t without losing precision?
> Nothing special. There's gint/guint/glong/gulong but they don't offer
> additional guarantees over int/long.
Why do they exist then? To give me a false feeling of security? Or there
is a deeper meaning?
.-. .-. Life is a sexually transmitted disease.
(_ \ / _)
] [Thread Prev