Re: [Swig-user] enum constants vs. functions returning an enum value

2006-08-16 Thread Chris Shoemaker
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 10:08:44PM -0500, John Lenz wrote: > On 08/16/06 20:19, Chris Shoemaker wrote: > > Assuming this behavior makes as much sense to other people as it does > > to me, I think the idea of using a static variable and a > > scm_c_define() is a good change. And we can wait for a f

SWIGification status

2006-08-16 Thread Chris Shoemaker
Devs, The swigify branch has a business-module with no g-wrap generated wrappers. I believe it's functionally equivalent to trunk. (Please let me know if you find any differences.) The process took about twice as long as I'd hoped, but I learned some valuable lessons along the way

Re: [Swig-user] enum constants vs. functions returning an enum value

2006-08-16 Thread Chris Shoemaker
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 12:06:39AM -0500, John Lenz wrote: > On 08/15/06 23:14, Chris Shoemaker wrote: > > > > And I was wrong about that last part. G-wrap does it right from C. > > > > So, SWIG uses scm_c_define_gsubr() to convert the enum value to a > > _function_ returning the enum value. > >

Re: Build on ubuntu is broken again

2006-08-16 Thread Nigel Titley
Chris Shoemaker wrote: > On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 07:52:28PM +0100, Nigel Titley wrote: > >> Same problem as before >> > > Please try r14673. Thanks. > This works fine. Thank you. Nigel ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org