On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 01:32 +0000, Tor Lillqvist wrote: > Mike Hearn writes: > > If you are going to do this, please make it optionally enabled (tied to > > the win32 UNICODE macro, perhaps?). > > The UNICODE macro directs using wchar_t vs. "normal" char Win32 > API. It would be very confusing to use it for some other purpose. > > > Please don't just magically make programs compiled against the glib > > 2.6 headers silently depend on 2.6 only symbols. > > I think we have done that in the past, too? I can't think of specific examples in the past (though we've never supported compile-on-newer, run-on-older), but there is certainly another example for 2.6 ... g_return_if_fail_warning(). I don't see constraining ourselves to support compile-on-newer run-on-older. There's a lot of useful stuff that that prohibits. Regards, Owen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part