| From: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(dot)geoghegan86(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgAdmin III commit: Revert the previous change that introduced sysSetti |
| Date: | 2011-02-19 02:45:29 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTik4zCbeTX4usKkMAo=cKjj48jUqK0RrMvGuiLwZ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgadmin-hackers |
Attached patch makes changes described to write() variants. What do you think?
I conducted a little test to verify that I correctly changed all call
sites - implicit casts can be tricky. Once I had finished changing the
function names and their call sites, I provided an overload of write
with const wxChar*, complete with implementation/definition. I then
provided just a declaration of all the old overloads of write(). I
wanted to see if I got any linker errors. The idea of the wxChar*
variant (the one with the implementation) is to prevent any
write(const wxString&, const wxChar*) calls from calling my
write(bool) declaration, as they prefer that to write(const wxString&,
const wxString&) . Anyway, none of the old declarations were called,
and I saw no linker errors.
--
Regards,
Peter Geoghegan
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| syssettings.patch | text/x-patch | 22.8 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nikhil S | 2011-02-21 09:17:50 | pgAdmin III: adjust code as per new EDB AS90 functions/procedures semantics |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2011-02-18 18:01:56 | Re: pgAdmin III commit: Revert the previous change that introduced sysSetti |