Re: [PATCH] - fix for 64 bit issues with OnUpdateInt

And of course the rest to use OnUpdateInteger().. --Jani On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Jani Taskinen wrote: > > Yes, I know, but we need to remain backwards compatible > so I'm adding OnUpdateInteger() and OnUpdateLong(). > > This leaves OnUpdateInt() as it is now. Just need to > go through the extensions and change the necessary > OnUpdateInt()'s to OnUpdateLong(). > > --Jani > > >On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, David Hill wrote: > >> >> >>> So for 4.3.2, we add the OnUpdateLong() and replace >>> all the calls to OnUpdateInt() to use that instead >>> and we leave the OnUpdateInt() behaviour same as it was. >>> This shouldn't cause BC problems then..? >> >>If you want to leave the current OnUpdateInt behavior (uses long * >>internally) ... then that will require some additional changes, as >>there are a dozen or so places where an int is currently passed to >>OnUpdateInt, which I left as is because I changed to using >>OnUpdateLong where a long was used. >> >>Dave >> >> >> >> > > -- <- For Sale! ->