On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 12:35:34 -0500, Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU> wrote:
> Quoth Tomi Ollila on Jan 18 at 10:15 am:
> > On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 17:25:46 -0500, Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU> wrote:
> > > Quoth Thomas Jost on Jan 17 at 11:50 am:
> > > >  
> > > > +#ifdef GMIME_26
> > > > +    /* sig_list may be created in both above cases, so we need to
> > > > +     * cleanly handle it here. */
> > > > +    if (node->sig_list) {
> > > > +	GMimeSignatureList **proxy =
> > > > +	    talloc (node, GMimeSignatureList *);
> > > 
> > > This doesn't need to be split into two lines.
> > > 
> > > > +	*proxy = node->sig_list;
> > > > +	talloc_set_destructor (proxy, _signature_list_free);
> > > > +    }
> > > > +#else
> > > >      if (node->verify_attempted && !node->sig_validity)
> > > >  	fprintf (stderr, "Failed to verify signed part: %s\n",
> > > >  		 (err ? err->message : "no error explanation given"));
> > > > +#endif
> > > 
> > > I'd rather see the above as a separate #ifdef GMIME_26 and #ifndef
> > > GMIME_26, since they aren't logical alternates of each other.
> > 
> > That reminds me that it should then be like GMIME_ATLEAST_26, so
> > that this might be useful when GMIME > 2.6 is available...
> 
> Hopefully before GMIME 2.8 comes out, we'll be able to remove all of
> the GMIME 2.4 compatibility.  But GMIME_ATLEAST_26 would be fine, too.

Heh, maybe things will change again in 2.8 and "ATLEAST_26" will become
"ONLY_26"... But changed to GMIME_ATLEAST_26 anyway, thanks for the
suggestion :)

-- 
Thomas/Schnouki