Re: [AD] File using int*_t types

[Evert Glebbeek <eglebbk@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sunday 07 August 2005 09:36, Hrvoje Ban wrote:
> Since allegro is now using (or guessing) int*_t typed I thought I might 
be a 
> good idea to use those for pack_get and put instead of int and long. I 
would 
> made patch myself but I don't have latest CVS (when using 4.2.0 b4 patch 
> removes some unrelated code).

I personally think they should also be called something 
pack_puti32/pack_puti16 etc. I think I made a proposal for this a while 
back but we decided against it for 4.2 (don't remember why exactly). I 
think we should switch to the int*_t types throughout the library 
eventually, but starting here is probably sensible.
It won't make it into 4.2 though, just so you know.

> BTW: didn't wanted to bump other thread, but is my END_OF_MAIN idea 
> discarded?

Did you submit a final proposal? I think the last one I saw was not tested 
well enough and depended too much on compiler-specific assumptions, 
besides looking more hackish than the current END_OF_MAIN(). But I also 
only half followed how it was supposed to work, so maybe you should 
explain (again) in some detail what it does exactly and what assumptions 
it makes on the behavior of the compiler. How easy is it to disable main 
mangling from user code, if that's what I want to do?
Either way, any patch for eliminating END_OF_MAIN() in Windows, though 
something I really like to do, is too late for 4.2. As long as 
END_OF_MAIN() remains nescessary on OS X, there also is little reason to 
remove it, except if the resulting code is less hackish than the current 
code.

Evert