Quite a fair size diff containing the fixes for exit, convertion from
i++ to ++i and casts. I won't do any more on the casts if that is the
will of the masses ;-)
The other very small attachments are my new catcher/thrower routines.
Very small and do the job. Looking back over a past couple of emails, it
seems that it is m(c)alloc which doesn't die instantly, whereas new,
while throwing the exception (and possibly terminating the app) can have
undefined effects (under RH8. RH8 is an odd beast with more than a few
annoying bugs. One of them is buffer overflows causing windows to just
stop responding. Very very annoying!)
Anyhoo, let me know what you think of the code.
I'm still wading through the Maestro format, but at least am making
headway on it now and can understand what is going on :-)
Tired of bloated software which gobbles up your system resources?
Bored of hearing your harddrive being thrashed by inefficient code?
Feel like tearing your hair out when you see a blue screen of death?
Then why not come over from the darkside, and become one of the ever
increasing number of people using Linux - it's free, it's open,
it's easier to use than Windows and more reliable as well.
On Wednesday 20 November 2002 14:31, PFJ wrote:
> Anyhoo, let me know what you think of the code.
As Chris and I said, I don't think we'll integrate this one. One reason is=
that it overlaps with the previous ones you've already sent (the C header=20
cleanups). The other is that, we agree the casts are fine as is, and=20
replacing operator new() just isn't worth the hassle. If you can seperate o=
the ++i changes then fine, but I'd much rather get an importer of the maest=