From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <insight-return-6980-listarch-insight=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 31839 invoked by alias); 30 Mar 2012 07:39:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 31634 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Mar 2012 07:39:07 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.5 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from outdoor.onevision.de (HELO outdoor.onevision.de) (212.77.172.51)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 Mar 2012 07:38:52 +0000
Received: from sanders.onevision.de (moonrace [212.77.172.62])	by outdoor.onevision.de (8.14.3/8.13.7/ROSCH/DDB) with ESMTP id q2U7ciP6032610;	Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:38:49 +0200
Received: from [192.168.5.32] ([192.168.5.32])          by sanders.onevision.de (Lotus Domino Release 8.5.1FP3)          with ESMTP id 2012033009383920-6710 ;          Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:38:39 +0200
Message-ID: <4F7562FE.5030308@onevision.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 07:39:00 -0000
From: Roland Schwingel <roland@onevision.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Keith Seitz <keiths@redhat.com>, insight@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Compliancy to windows 64bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Mailing-List: contact insight-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <insight.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:insight-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/insight/>
List-Post: <mailto:insight@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:insight-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: insight-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-q1/txt/msg00049.txt.bz2

Hi...

Keith Seitz <keiths@redhat.com> wrote on 30.03.2012 00:56:53:

 > Wow, I had no idea we were harboring such evil code... Passing host
 > pointers into the interpreter and back again. Eeeew! [Alas, this portion
 > of insight is probably about the oldest...] This whole thing should have
 > been done some other way. [But that's probably not the comment you're
 > attempting to elicit. :-)]
;-)

 > Just a nit:
 > > -  arguments = (long) clientData;
 > > +  arguments = clientData!=NULL?1:0;
 > This isn't formatted properly. It should be:
 >
 > arguments = clientData != NULL ? 1 : 0;
Fixed that on commit.

 > Okay with that change.
I also updated copyright years in the 2 files touched by my changes and 
mentioned that in Changelog.

Roland