> Done.
Thanks!
Jochen
On Thu, Feb 03, 2000 at 03:24:01PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I would prefer something like
Done.
--
"Never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by stupidity."
via, but not speaking for Deutsche Bank
> My thinking was that C requires less
> knowledge of internals than C. With C, I can think about
> increasing or decreasing priority without worrying about the exact
> numeric priority.
In my opinion, this is true if you have a certain watcher running and want to change
its priority. Then it's
On Thu, Feb 03, 2000 at 01:28:33PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> after installing Event 0.62, I just discovered this (relatively new)
> warning in the description of the priority attribute:
>
> "You should not specify prio in the constructor. Use C instead
> for an offset from the default pr
Hello,
after installing Event 0.62, I just discovered this (relatively new)
warning in the description of the priority attribute:
"You should not specify prio in the constructor. Use C instead
for an offset from the default priority."
What's the reason for this strong suggestion? I expicitly U
