On Tuesday 23 October 2001 09:50 am, Jeff Trawick wrote: > Ryan Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > This patch implements my idea for a new API to apr_proc_wait and > > apr_proc_all_wait. > > <nitpick> > I'm a wee bit nervous that we use an enumerated type for a bitmask. > Using an enumeration for the values of the bits seems fine but maybe > using some unsigned int value is best? We'd expect an enumerated type > to hold only the values in the enumeration, not some OR of some of > them. > </nitpick> > > <seeing the forest in spite of the trees> > but overall this is an important improvement so +1 for committing it, > and if by some chance something breaks or a tweak is needed later we > can easily handle it. > </seeing the forest in spite of the trees>
Committing within an hour. I went back and forth about the enum, and decided to just use it for now. Ryan ______________________________________________________________ Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------
