> Every time that notification arrives, GAB sends [delegate > growlIsReady], if the delegate responds to it, and then removes one > notification handler.
Which means that the second one (if it should come at all) will be discarded. > If -growlIsReady is not safe to call twice (and we can't assume that > it is), then this can result in unpredictable problems. But we can check and don't need to assume, right? As far as I can see this call-pattern is completely safe - and needs to be so anyway, because if an application can create wrong behaviour by doing this inadvertently, that would be a bug anyway. So: * Calling setGrowlDelegate: needs to be safe to call multiple times anyway because it's clients might * Calling setGrowlDelegate: multiple times is safe - because the critical behaviour - talking to the daemon happens via DistributedNotifications - where this behaviour is specified and safe as documented. I'm asking this because I like about this solution that it is very simple - and it also gives a preset from which refactoring can pursue. Greetings, Martin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Growl Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
