On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 02:05:04PM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote: > I have two conflicting thoughts, so I'll put them both out there for > discussion. > > 1) I agree (mostly) RESOURCE filters are really the only ones that make > sense to add multiple times. We should ensure that no other filters are > added more than once. > > 2) It is up to the filter to protect against this case. That can be > done by walking the filter chain to ensure that the same filter isn't in > the list already. Of course, walking the chain could be slow, depending > on how many filters there are.
How could the filter itself protect against this case? By the time it is called, it is already too late - the chain is created. Or am I missing something? The only thing I can think of is that it it looks at f/f->next to make sure that there are no other copies left in the chain that haven't been called. I think it would be better to just protect against that when we *add* filters rather than when we execute them. I will commit the strcmp check now. -- justin
