On Tuesday 08 March 2011, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote: > indeed it was not something complex, it is why I thought it worth doing. > However,my idea was slightly different to use a parameter for > allow_trusted(), so you can have many calls of the function with > different behaviour.
I looked at that option and I'm all for it (there are already enough functions dependent on 'global' parameters), but there are already 2 allow_trusted functions for 0 or 2 parameters. Adding another (1st or 3rd) optional parameter to those would make a complete mess of it, requiring 4 implementations and forwarding the option through a series of functions. Making them non-optional would not be backwards compatible, which was the whole purpose of making it configurable. -- Greetings, Alex Hermann _______________________________________________ sr-dev mailing list sr-dev@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
