Hi,
On Nov 19, 2007 8:12 PM, The Rasterman Carsten Haitzler
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 11:11:55 -0600 "Nathan Ingersoll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> babbled:
>
> > Is this a proper fix or hiding a bug in the calling application (or
> > another part of the lib)? I would think the ap
Fixed and committed. First I've heard of these evas environment
variables or that EWL generated warnings with them.
On 11/19/07, Brett Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-11-19 at 19:54 -0500, dan sinclair wrote:
> > I'm not seeing this when I have full debug on with Ewl. Can you please
Oh, Evas Errors. Sorry, wasn't paying attention. I thought you were
talking about Ewl warnings. I haven't tried to turn on the Evas stuff
before.
dan
On 19-Nov-07, at 8:18 PM, Brett Nash wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-11-19 at 19:54 -0500, dan sinclair wrote:
>> I'm not seeing this when I have full
On Mon, 2007-11-19 at 19:54 -0500, dan sinclair wrote:
> I'm not seeing this when I have full debug on with Ewl. Can you please
> post an example program that shows this behavour? We've been trying to
> cleanup as many of the warnings as we can in the system. There are a
> few warnings spit b
I'm not seeing this when I have full debug on with Ewl. Can you please
post an example program that shows this behavour? We've been trying to
cleanup as many of the warnings as we can in the system. There are a
few warnings spit but not many.
dan
On 19-Nov-07, at 7:14 PM, Brett Nash wrote:
On Mon, 2007-11-19 at 17:38 -0600, Nathan Ingersoll wrote:
> On 11/19/07, The Rasterman Carsten Haitzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 11:11:55 -0600 "Nathan Ingersoll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > babbled:
> >
> > personally i like defensive programming. it's better than every pro
On 11/19/07, The Rasterman Carsten Haitzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 11:11:55 -0600 "Nathan Ingersoll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> babbled:
>
> personally i like defensive programming. it's better than every process having
> to trap its segv's/aborts and give u a debug trace and s
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 11:11:55 -0600 "Nathan Ingersoll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
babbled:
> Is this a proper fix or hiding a bug in the calling application (or
> another part of the lib)? I would think the application should be
> responsible of knowing when they should unref the connection.
personally i
Yes, a warning would be better than silently returning.
On 11/17/07, Kenneth Christiansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At least it would be better to show an error, than just returning, right?
>
> - Kenneth
>
> On 11/17/07, Ulisses Furquim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Nov 17, 2007 2:11 PM, Na
At least it would be better to show an error, than just returning, right?
- Kenneth
On 11/17/07, Ulisses Furquim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Nov 17, 2007 2:11 PM, Nathan Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is this a proper fix or hiding a bug in the calling application (or
> > another pa
On Nov 17, 2007 2:11 PM, Nathan Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is this a proper fix or hiding a bug in the calling application (or
> another part of the lib)? I would think the application should be
> responsible of knowing when they should unref the connection.
I strongly agree with you.
Is this a proper fix or hiding a bug in the calling application (or
another part of the lib)? I would think the application should be
responsible of knowing when they should unref the connection.
On 11/16/07, Enlightenment CVS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Enlightenment CVS committal
>
> Author :
12 matches
Mail list logo
