On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 03:58:02PM +0100, Alejandro Mery <[email protected]> wrote:
> > that. He can recall ev_run, but does ev have a way of telling you
> > whether it's returned immediately because there are no watchers?
>
> it smells like a return value for ev_run(), no?
ev_loop returning e.g. the break value (or EVBREAK_CANCEL which could have an
EVBREAK_NONE alias) sounds like a much more acceptable solution to me.
I still haven't seen a reason why this is needed though, or even
convenient - all cases ehere I have seen ev_break being an issue already
need to maintain an extra flag anyway.
It still could be wrong, but I don't want to expose internals more than
necessary, so that menas that either I need to understand why it's needed or
I need to understand why it's just so convenient.
Changing ev_run also is an ABI change (and will break the perl interface,
but fortunately not most C users).
--
The choice of a Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG
-----==- _GNU_ http://www.deliantra.net
----==-- _ generation
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [email protected]
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\
_______________________________________________
libev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.schmorp.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libev
