On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 05:37:33PM +0200, Sander Striker wrote: > > yeah, well it seems to me that this would be a really smart > > thing to do _anyway_. > > > > throw an assert if someone tries to register the same > > 'object' twice, not just a child-sms. > > > > is that possible? > > Possible, yes :) mmm.... i don't like the sound of that. possible, yes. [terry pratchett readers will be familiar with this] hm, sounds like you're a dwarf who's just been asked to Botch an engineering job and Get It Done By Wednesday...
...what's the catch? :) > > if you have a file object, how can you check it's not the same? > > > > .... by using the cleanup function's address _and_ the void* > > as the 'key'? > > > > does that work? > > Yes (but you need to add the type too). That is how the matching > works in sms cleanups already. We just don't do a check for > uniqueness in the registration function yet. okay, okay: forgot about that. yep! > > .... about the only exception is the null cleanup [is that used > > in sms?] > > We don't have a null cleanup in sms. It is not needed here. > Although I have come across a situation which could screw up > the entire idea behind the sms cleanups. It was in http_log.c > I believe... :( [I'll expand on that later] separate subject? lukes
