On 12/02/2017 11:57 PM, Miller Puckette wrote: > Or (aha) - I could make up new function names for the "int" versions and > change the pd sources to use them, and declare the existing ones obsolete...? > > In fact, is there any reason one can't just globally replace every call > to atom_getint and atom_getintarg with the atom_getfloat equivalent - let > externs blithely call atom_getint and get a t_int back all they want.
i guess atom_getint() is there mainly for Max compat (where an atom *can* hold integer values). In a Pd-only land there shouldn't be a difference. > > That would touch a lot of files so if I do it perhaps I should make sure > to do all the PR-merging I possibly can beforehand. > > AND: there's no reason I can't assign a float to an int without a cast, is > there? As I understand it the only clang complaint is int-to-smaller-int > conversions. So int x = atom_getfloat(&atom) is still kosher, correct? > i think so. gfds IOhannes
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
