[cffi-devel] Re: implicit defbitfield symbol values

[Stephen Compall]

On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 13:05 +0100, Luís Oliveira wrote:
> Pushed. Thanks.

http://scompall.nocandysw.com/cffi/single-bits-only.darcs.patch contains
some followups.

I was thinking, though, should the starting point be 0 or 1?  I don't
know which more people would expect, and selected 0 because that's what
the defbitfield doc in the manual seemed to imply.

-- 
Stephen Compall
http://scompall.nocandysw.com/blog
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/cffi-devel/attachments/20060511/700b0e22/attachment.sig>