On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 11:32:29AM +0100, felix winkelmann wrote: > Yes, blame him! ;-) > > Using parameters for all configuration options wasn't such a great idea > from the beginning. It makes sense to use parameters, when you want > thread-local options, but the spiffy configuration should be applied > to all threads anyway. Note that thread-specific parameters are still > that: parameters.
I have to disagree. They /were/ a very good idea, since they allow you to fire up multiple instances of spiffy with different configurations (like on several ports) from one application. I sacrificed flexibility few people will use for another kind of flexibility more people will use. I think it's a good tradeoff. Regards, Peter -- http://www.student.ru.nl/peter.bex -- "The process of preparing programs for a digital computer is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic experience much like composing poetry or music." -- Donald Knuth
pgpa03hp0Ti3L.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
