I was following IOhannes' prompt about t_int: "rule of thumb: never use it for anything but passing data to perform-routines."

On Dec 2, 2017, at 10:22 PM, Miller Puckette <msp@ucsd.edu> wrote:

I'm pretty confused about this.  I believe it was "t_int" in 0.48-0, and
I see that your PR changesit from "t_int" to "int" - and I believe
it has to be "t_int" for back compatibility...

cheers
M

On Sat, Dec 02, 2017 at 10:16:44PM +0100, Dan Wilcox wrote:
I think I had already fixed this: https://github.com/pure-data/pure-data/pull/223 <https://github.com/pure-data/pure-data/pull/223> (?) Or am I missing something?

On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:40 PM, Miller Puckette <msp@ucsd.edu> wrote:

I had one small ouch: I don't think I can compatibly change t_int to int
in m_pd.h (this is mentioned on another thread somewhere).  I don't know how
to make clang pipe down about this short of casting almost every call to
atom_getint*() in the whole tree.  Yuck...  Maybe it's better just to tell
clang to be more permissive (if that's possible)?

--------
Dan Wilcox
@danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika>
danomatika.com <http://danomatika.com/>
robotcowboy.com <http://robotcowboy.com/>




--------
Dan Wilcox
@danomatika
danomatika.com
robotcowboy.com