From: Alex P. <pes...@ma...> - 2011-12-30 07:47:55
|
On 12/29/11 22:05, Leyne, Sean wrote: >> The reason for signed type here was (at least visible reason) very simple >> - into some functions using same parameter might >> be passed transaction number (positive value) and something else (negative >> value). I.e. negative sign meant 'this is not transaction' and function behaved >> according to it. > And some people have complained about some of my suggestions as being "hacks"!!! > Sean, certainly it was hack, but it left in codebase since pre-firebird times. In fb3 it was cleaned up. We try to remove such 'solutions' from the code, and certainly do not want to add new ones. |