2013/10/4 David Herrmann <dh.herrm...@gmail.com>: > Hi > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 2:34 PM, Daniel Stone <dan...@fooishbar.org> wrote: >> On 4 October 2013 13:09, Wander Lairson Costa <wander.lair...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> That's what the patch is about: avoid casts. Whenever you use a cast, >>> you are giving up the help the compiler may give to you regarding >>> invalid type conversions. So, I always use the rule of thumb of >>> avoiding casts whenever I can. IMO, this is not a harmful patch and >>> will make the C++ programmers a little bit easier. >> >> I can see where it's going, but on the other hand xkb_mod_mask_t is >> _so_ not the right type. That's a bitmask of actual modifiers (i.e. >> the return value), not a bitmask of components. So it avoids the >> cast, but also makes the API look extremely misleading, as we've >> documented exactly what xkb_mod_mask_t is. >> >> I really like the type safety aspect, so to be honest I'm just >> inclined to make C++ wear the cast for now. > > We had a similar discussion when I pointed out that "enum" may change > the underlying type without notice when adding new enum-values. But I > agree with Daniel, the GCC type-safety for enums in C is a very handy > feature. So I'm also no big fan of the patch, sorry. >
We have conflictings pros and cons here, with different tradeoffs, I perfectly understand that. -- Best Regards, Wander Lairson Costa _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel