On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 11:50:47AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >... > > and loop through an arbitrary number of reads, incrementing until the totals > > matched. That's the least intrusive approach. I'll implement it if people > > agree. > > Thoughts? > > split_any needs to make sure it is splitting at the correct > location. However, now we are talking about a different function, which > is a brigade split based on offset. If that is what we are after, then > the name is incorrect.
Hrm. True. If you have a pipe bucket and you ask to split at 1000, but the pipe contains 500, then you're actually splitting *past* the pipe and into the brigade. I'd be *quite* happy to rename it as "ap_brigade_split()". And to have it return the bucket pointer where the split occurs. (that isn't super clear...) Like so: brigade split-head \ \ B1 -> B2 -> B3 -> B4 -> B5 -> B6 Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
