On Tue, Dec 25, 2007 at 04:55:58PM +0800, zou lunkai wrote:
> On Dec 25, 2007 4:48 PM, strk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 25, 2007 at 07:47:10AM +0000, Zou Lunkai wrote:
> >
> > > + if( ! _intervalTimers.empty() )
> > > + {
> > > + // process actions queued when executing interval callbacks
> > > + processActionQueue();
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > }
> >
> > The above doesn't seem correct.
> > The fact that _intervalTimers is not empty doesn't mean any was
> > actually expired...
> > Better have executeTimers return a value to notify whether or not
> > any was expired.
> >
>
> Logicallly, this check is not even needed. It is just for optimizing.
> ie. if there is no interval callbacks, no actions would be queued,
> thus we don't need to process any actions within
> 'movie_root::executeTimers()' function body.
Yeah, I've just read the diff, not the code. Is fine then.
--strk;
_______________________________________________
Gnash-commit mailing list
Gnash-commit@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnash-commit
