On Wednesday 11 June 2003 01:01 pm, Christopher Arnold wrote: > On Wed, 11 Jun 2003, Tilghman Lesher wrote: > > On Wednesday 11 June 2003 10:43 am, Christopher Arnold wrote: > > > a) Is there state building up if my macro calls itself > > > recusivly? > > > > A macro is NOT a function. It simply is a shortcut to doing a > > longer series of commands. A macro cannot itself be recursive. > > Hmm shame on me... > So that is why it is called a Macro! :-) > > > > Or should i use a Goto(newcontext,s,1)? > > > > I think you're confused as to what a macro can and cannot do. > > Until you understand that distinction, you're going to have > > trouble understanding how a macro works within the system. > > Shure i am. So i really should se a macro as something close to a > #define in C?
Quite analogous. > > In any case, I'd recommend that you forget about using macros > > and instead use AGI. > > I had the impression that it was possible without AGI, but ok ill > follow the oracles advice. Does anyone have any pointers to > documentation on the AGI interface? http://asterisk.drunkcoder.com/agi.cgi It certainly is possible without AGI, but then again, I tend to code stuff in C even when it probably would be faster to write in Perl and AGI. > Another state question: > It would be possible to implement my functionality with a circle of > contexts. (I actually have a running proof of concept > implementation) But how is it in this case, would asterisk build up > a huge state if someone rotates around to much in the loop of > contexts? As you aren't calling functions, you aren't creating a deeper stack, and therefore, aren't accumulating additional state information. Every branch is just a jump, with no return address stored. Subroutines might be in the future of the Asterisk extension logic, but they aren't there now. -Tilghman _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
