----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102251/#review5578 -----------------------------------------------------------
Makes sense to protect strings and KUrls indeed. But I do not think we need this many mutexes. - Sebastian On Aug. 8, 2011, 8:55 a.m., Vishesh Handa wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102251/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Aug. 8, 2011, 8:55 a.m.) > > > Review request for Nepomuk and Sebastian Trueg. > > > Summary > ------- > > Many of the variables need to be accessed in IndexScheduler need to be > protected with a mutex. > > I think it's better to use multiple mutexes instead of one. > > > This addresses bug 279347. > http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=279347 > > > Diffs > ----- > > nepomuk/services/strigi/indexscheduler.h 4c83d04 > nepomuk/services/strigi/indexscheduler.cpp 9e83a89 > > Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102251/diff > > > Testing > ------- > > Nope. Don't know how to test this. > > > Thanks, > > Vishesh > >
_______________________________________________ Nepomuk mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
