On 12/4/06, Martin Nordholts <enselic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> gegl_node_connect_to is much better. Why would we want to have two terms
> for the same thing? The code for it would be
>
> gboolean
> gegl_node_connect_to (GeglNode *self, const gchar *source_pad_name,
> GeglNode *sink, const gchar *sink_pad_name)
> {
> return gegl_node_connect_from (sink, sink_pad_name, self,
> source_pad_name);
> }
2006-12-04 Øyvind Kolås <pippin@xxxxxxxx>
Added a gegl_node_connect_to function as syntachtic sugar for
gegl_node_connect_from. Since gegl_node_connect_to might lead
to clearer code in some cases.
2006-12-04 Øyvind Kolås <pippin@xxxxxxxx>
%s/gegl_node_connect/gegl_node_connect_from/
/Øyvind K.
--
«The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed»
-- William Gibson
http://pippin.gimp.org/ http://ffii.org/
_______________________________________________
Gegl-developer mailing list
Gegl-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer
