Re: Moving to pointer-sized GType?

[Alex Larsson <alexl redhat com>]

On 14 Sep 2001, Dan Winship wrote:

> > The change will be fully source compatible for code that correctly uses 
> > GType, but unfortunately there are some places in our codebases that use 
> > uint instead of GType/GtkType to store/handle types, and these will break 
> > on 64bit architectures (warning + segfault), but silently work on 32bit 
> > architectures.
> 
> Adding more ways for the teeming 32bit-only hordes to unwittingly break
> things for 64bit architectures seems bad. Couldn't you just make GType
> be a gpointer and use GPOINTER_TO_UINT or whatever in the few places
> where you want to think of them as integers? (Which would only be inside
> the type system itself, right?)

This breaks the concept of constant value fundamental types and the 
ability to switch on GType.

/ Alex