On 26.07.2006 17:39, Jean-frederic Clere wrote: > Ruediger Pluem wrote: >> >> >> Too much copy and paste? We already found it above and what we are >> searching for >> is in *new isn't it? (Maybe we should also set *new to NULL in the >> beginning to >> have a defined return value?) >> >> > No... There is a typo: > if (next->next) > should be: > if (!next->next) > To stop on the last item of the list. > It really attaches to the shared memory and has to read the max number > of slot available.
Sounds reasonable. Looks like I got confused :-). Regards RĂ¼diger
