[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Freetype] Lonely Longs
From: |
Werner LEMBERG |
Subject: |
Re: [Freetype] Lonely Longs |
Date: |
Wed, 28 Jul 2004 01:58:59 +0200 (CEST) |
> What I did, more recently than two years ago, on the DM642 was to
> avoid the use of the five byte longs by doing this: [...]
Thanks, I've added this to the CVS.
> A quick look through the code revealed that there was some use of
> "naked long" i.e. without using the freetype type definition. This
> at least has the _potential_ to cause problems, but didn't seem to
> interfere with the operation, at least as far as I got. My
> suggested solution for this would be to replace usage of "long" &
> "unsigned long" with "FT_LONG" & "FT_ULONG".
Well, I won't do anything right now, waiting for bug reports :-)
Werner