On Mon, 24 May 2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Thanks. I've just committed a patch to remove the newlines as they > are no longer needed when using g_warning.
Ok. I guess you got the routing.c and the one line in props.c as well? [props.c 1.39: line 1357] - static const char fmt[] = "Bad line %u in config file, ignored\n"; + static const char fmt[] = "Bad line %u in config file, ignored"; It is much easier to be a critic than an artist. I especially like the removal of the all the strdups and the GCC format checking. The strdup change should reduce the allocation load of GTKG. I didn't even know about the GCC format checking, so I am glad I looked at the changes. The integer assert checks were also a very good change. Maybe I can ask what the heck the "fake name" is about? I have seen GTKG clients with a "!gtk-gnutella" user agent. Also, would there be a restriction against using the OpenSSL assembler routines for the SHA calcs? Or is there a rule against putting assembler into GTKG? Would it be worthwhile to benchmark some hashes to see if it was a worthwhile pursuit? Thanks, Bill Pringlemeir. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click _______________________________________________ Gtk-gnutella-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gtk-gnutella-devel
