It's for verbose info output. "gc.process" is simple enough.

Thanks,

-xiaofeng

On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Senaka Fernando <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>  It seems that the string "gc.process" is used in many places within the gc
>  source. Wouldn't it be better to define this in some common include?
>
>  Regards,
>  Senaka
>



-- 
http://xiao-feng.blogspot.com

Reply via email to