On Nov 2, 2012, at 12:06 PM, "Siwek, Jonathan Luke" <[email protected]> wrote:

> This code already exists because of the similarity of functions and events, 
> it's just that functions are only allowed multiple body definitions if they 
> have &redef, and in that case, the later definition *replaces* earlier ones 
> instead of being pushed on to the vector of bodies.

Ahh, that makes sense.

I actually thought about it a bit more and I'm still not completely attached to 
the idea.  I sort of don't like how the documentation for that would look where 
we have to say that normally you shouldn't implement a function over and over, 
but in special cases it's just how something works.

I almost wonder if we should have another type of code block in addition to 
events and functions.  It's really just a difference in semantics at this 
point, but it would be much easier to document if there was a completely 
different name.  We could document the use and behavior of each of them very 
clearly with the third name.

  .Seth

--
Seth Hall
International Computer Science Institute
(Bro) because everyone has a network
http://www.bro-ids.org/


_______________________________________________
bro-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev

Reply via email to