? 2012?3?21? ??3:21?David Henningsson <david.henningsson at canonical.com>??? > On 03/20/2012 03:48 PM, rong deng wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> This is Deng Zhenrong from Shanghai China, I've already used Linux as my >> main desktop for several years. Now I would like to express my interests >> in applying pulseaudio's projects for this year's GSoC in this mail. >> > > Hi Deng and welcome to PulseAudio! :-) > > Hi David, Thanks for replying this message. > More contributors are always welcome. As for GSoC, I have never mentored > anyone and won't be able to do so this summer either, so I'll let somebody > else answer to that. > > No problem. :-) > Glancing through the ideas, I find I'm interested in several few >> already. :) But I'd like to focus on one thing which is test/log >> facilities for now. I'm still doing my homework on this topic and I'll >> come up with more detailed info in later days. >> >> So to get my hands dirty, I've already downloaded pulseaudio source code >> and compile it and set it up. Now I find there's a compilation warning, >> and here's my patch to fix it, cool :) >> >> I'm attaching the patch generated from git format-patch, I'm not sure >> whether it's OK, as I see it from the mailing list, other developers >> send patches directly in mails. This patch is my first one to get >> familiar with the workflow, if there's anything wrong, please tell me. :) >> > > As for the patch, I believe you did most things right. :-) Some people > prefer you send the patch using "git send-email", but for me, it does not > matter much. > > OK. I'll try to use "git send-email" for later patches. I haven't set up this mail system yet, I'll try to figure it out... > As for using the PRI-prefixes, it seems we do not use this anywhere else > in the code. Therefore I have two questions: > > 1) Do you think there is a risk that some compiler that we want to build > PulseAudio under, does not support these prefixes (remember, this is not > only used in Linux, but in Windows, Mac OS, OS/2 IIRC and others)? > > No, I don't think it's a risk, as this PRI-prefix is defined in inttypes.h header file, and according to manual, it is a standard. > 2) Would "%llx" solve this warning equally well? > > On 32-bit system, yes, but then, it's not portable. To print uin64_t on 32 bit system, we should use %llx, but to print it on 64 bit system, we should use %lx instead. PRI-prefix help us handle this. Yes, there IS another way to handle, we can explicitly cast 'pa_channel_position_mask_t' to 'unsigned long long' and use %llx. It's up to you guys whether it should use PRI-prefix or use this cast. I'm OK with these both methods. :) --rong -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/pulseaudio-discuss/attachments/20120321/14bf52e2/attachment.htm>
