Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Cstruct.blit_to_string uses bytes? #202

Closed
samoht opened this issue Jun 28, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

Cstruct.blit_to_string uses bytes? #202

samoht opened this issue Jun 28, 2018 · 5 comments

Comments

@samoht
Copy link
Member

samoht commented Jun 28, 2018

In version 3.2.1, blit_to_string has the wrong signature:

val blit_to_string: t -> int -> bytes -> int -> int -> unit

We should either remove that (deprecated) function or provides something which actually uses a string, even if I don't know exactly what that means in this case. Probably something like unsafe_blit_to_string?

@emillon
Copy link
Contributor

emillon commented Mar 6, 2019

blit_to_string is marked as a deprecated (since 2015) alias to blit_to_bytes, so I think it's safe to delete.

@XVilka
Copy link
Contributor

XVilka commented Mar 12, 2019

So this one can be closed, right?

@emillon
Copy link
Contributor

emillon commented Mar 12, 2019

Yes, I think so!

@hannesm
Copy link
Member

hannesm commented Apr 9, 2019

the @deprecated ocamldoc attribute didn't lead to OCaml compiler warnings, also blit_to_string is still used quite a bit. I'd propose to merge #251 which uses [@@ocaml.deprecated] and remove that function from the next major version. WDYT?

@hannesm
Copy link
Member

hannesm commented Apr 15, 2019

now that #251 is merged, I'll close this issue. thanks for the report!

@hannesm hannesm closed this as completed Apr 15, 2019
@hannesm hannesm changed the title Cstruct.blit_from_string uses bytes? Cstruct.blit_to_string uses bytes? Apr 15, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants