Am Donnerstag, den 13.12.2007, 17:31 +0100 schrieb Alexander Larsson:
>
> typedef enum {
> G_FILE_QUERY_INFO_FLAGS_NONE = 0,
> G_FILE_QUERY_INFO_NOFOLLOW_SYMLINKS = (1<<0)
> }
>
> vs
>
> typedef enum {
> G_FILE_MONITOR_FLAGS_NONE = 0,
> G_FILE_MONITOR_FLAGS_MONITOR_MOUNTS = (1<<0)
> } GFileMonitorFlags;
>
> What do people think is the best approach here?
To my knowledge GTK+ would call them:
typedef enum { /*< flags >*/
G_FILE_QUERY_INFO_NONE = 0,
G_FILE_QUERY_INFO_NOFOLLOW_SYMLINKS = (1<<0)
} GFileQueryInfoFlags;
and
typedef enum { /*< flags >*/
G_FILE_MONITOR_NONE = 0,
G_FILE_MONITOR_MONITOR_MOUNTS = (1<<0)
} GFileMonitorFlags;
A problem is the doublicate "monitor", so the second value should be
something like:
G_FILE_MONITOR_WATCH_MOUNTS
Ciao,
Mathias
--
Mathias Hasselmann <mathias taschenorakel de>
http://taschenorakel.de/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil