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

Reply via email to