Should we switch from KDE_fseek to QT_FSEEK, etc. ? was: Re: [Kde-pim] kmail doesn't compile from trunk on Slackware GNU/Linux

[Thiago Macieira]

On Thursday 24 January 2008 15:04:25 Jarosław Staniek wrote:
> I guees you are compiling for 64 bits?
> Giovanni, KDE_fseek == fseek64 was a mistake and will be fixed - please
> replace that with QT_FSEEK or fseek locally in the kmail code.
> The problem is only discovered now because before nobody tried to use
> KDE_fseek.
>
>
> The question is whether we should switch to the following macros from
> qplatformdefs.h:
>
> QT_FTELL
> QT_LSEEK
> QT_FSEEK
> QT_STAT
>
> etc.
> (and making many of the KDE_* macros obsolete or just aliases)
>
> Note 1: that the KDE_* macros were added before Qt4.
> Note 2: the kde_file.h should still be accessible for C code.

Why are we using the low-level functions in the first place? Shouldn't the 
code be using QFile?

Why do we even have C code?

-- 
  Thiago Macieira  -  thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
    PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
    E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20080124/4910e6da/attachment.sig>