On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 16:27:51 -0500 Troman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >It is a cleaner approach, but for me it is more intuitively to use >MALLOC >since already the name implies that malloc functionality will be >used at >some point. And these 2 new macros will not replace all occurances >of >MALLOC, so we are just introducing more macros for the same >functionality. > >But anyway, I will be an impartial executor of a collective >opinion. To make >it painless for everyone if no objections will be raised until >tomorrow >evening I will just go on and apply the patch. > >Troman > Also keep in mind that when using VS, and your using their debug libs to catch memory errors via the _CrtDumpMemoryLeaks() call in the debugger, having more macros on top of other macros gets very messy.
Are people actually testing all these patches by playing a few different skirmish games, and then some campaign games, and seeing if something breaks? I also forgot who it was, but the person doing the 64bit port, are they still around? Concerned about your privacy? Instantly send FREE secure email, no account required http://www.hushmail.com/send?l=480 Get the best prices on SSL certificates from Hushmail https://www.hushssl.com?l=485 _______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
