Hi,
Personally, I would lean towards freeing the remove/replace'd item as long as
the destroy function has been specified, but I can accept that there may be
cases where this may not be desirable or necessary.
I guess all that's needed is to call mu_list_locate before calling
mu_list_remove/replace and the caller can then do whatever it wants with the
unwanted item. Maybe that's sufficient and it would mean that existing programs
would not need changing.
What does everyone else think?
Andy
> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:46:20 +0300
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> CC: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [bug-mailutils] mu_list_remove/replace
>
> Andrew Barnes <[email protected]> ha escrit:
>
> > I've been looking at the list handling routines and I don't think that
> > mu_list_remove and mu_list_replace is calling destroy_item to
> > actually release the item.
>
> No, they does not. Actually, they are not supposed to: it is the
> caller's responsibility. Do you think this should be changed?
>
> Regards,
> Sergey
_________________________________________________________________
With Windows Live, you can organise, edit, and share your photos.
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/134665338/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Bug-mailutils mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-mailutils
