Parameter types of image_surface API
David Weiß <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.cairo |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <E8D289FB71C3004B832D1702922D3A200313C1D707@SKA-WN-E25CEX.ptvag.ptv.de> |
Hey, I'm wondering whether there's any reason for the image_surface API to use signed datatypes for width/height parameters? I think unsigned int makes more sense. Also, none of the parameters is defined as const. E.g. and especially for getters like cairo_image_surface_get_width() it's IMHO better style (and semantics) to pass const cairo_surface_t * const instead of just cairo_surface_t *. Is there a technical reason not to do so? Blessings, -- David Weiß PTV GROUP Logistics Software Development Haid-und-Neu-Str. 15, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> www.ptvgroup.com<http://www.ptvgroup.com/> http://ptv.to/facebook PTV Planung Transport Verkehr AG Headquarters: Karlsruhe Executive Board: Vincent Kobesen (CEO) Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Dr. h.c. Frank-Jürgen Weise Commercial Register (HRB-Nr): 109262 Local Court: Mannheim -- cairo mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cairographics.org/mailman/listinfo/cairo