Type safety of protocol calls

[Chris Morgan]

On Feb 6, 2011, at 1:22 PM, "Kristian Høgsberg" <krh at bitplanet.net> wrote:

> 2011/2/6 Chris Morgan <chmorgan at gmail.com>:
>> On Sunday, February 6, 2011, Kristian Høgsberg <krh at bitplanet.net> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Chris Morgan <chmorgan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hello.
>>>>
>>>> I ran into an issue figuring out how a resize event made it's way from
>>>> window.c in the client to shell.c on the server. I think I figured out
>>>> the mapping and sent a patch that performs the mapping between the two
>>>> different types being used.
>>>
>>> I saw the patch, but the window.h #defines are defined to match the
>>> protocol enumeration where they overlap for convenience.  That's
>>> perfectly legal in C, safe and convenient.. You may not like that
>>> technique, but claiming that the protocol isn't typesafe for this
>>> reason is a little disingenuous.
>>>
>>> Kristian
>>>
>>
>> Hi.
>>
>> I thought when a function called for an enum that in c++ a warning or
>> error was generated when passing anything other than that enum into
>> that function? I thought that was generally considered type safety,
>> should I have called it strict type conversion instead?
>
> You're talking about C++ and C++ type conversion.  Wayland is written in C.
>
> Kristian

Maybe we could compile the c code as c++? Wouldn't require using
classes etc but would provide better type conversion checking.

Chris