Marc Lehmann, el 21 de enero a las 18:06 me escribiste: > > If we assume we can do that, why don't just making the old default_loop > > instantiated as a static global variable? That way is more > > straightforward. > > Because we cannot initialise that static variable, or the user again ahs to > call a method, which brings us back to the beginning of havign a method that > needs to be called.
User will need to call a method/funtion always, maybe one can say that calling the constructor is less explicit, but you didn't like the explicit instantiation either. So I don't understand what's your idea. > Remember the reason for this static thingabob was to avoid having to call > a method in the first place. I don't remember. I don't understand what you mean either :) -- Leandro Lucarella (luca) | Blog colectivo: http://www.mazziblog.com.ar/blog/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- People love to judge homeless guys. Like, your giving him money he's just gonna waste it. He's just gonna waste the money Well, he lives in a box, what do you want him to do? Save up and buy a wall unit? Take a little run to the store for a throw rug and a CD rack? He's homeless. _______________________________________________ libev mailing list libev@lists.schmorp.de http://lists.schmorp.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libev
