On 7/7/07, Per Inge Mathisen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Then the died flag will also have a random value. It just so happens
that > 0 is a more common random value than == 0. This is, IMHO, not a
fix at all. We should fix the root problem, not remove the warnings
indicating that there is a probl
On 7/7/07, The Watermelon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sorry, maybe I'm just a little slow, but why would it have invalid
> > facing because it died?
>
> it shouldnt but sometimes the psActionTarget got freed without setting to
> 0,thus holding some random value and causes the assert.Luckily 'die
On 7/7/07, Per Inge Mathisen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/7/07, The Watermelon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/6/07, Per Inge Mathisen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/6/07, The Watermelon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > removed the excessive CHECK_DROID at the beginning of
> > > acti
On 7/7/07, The Watermelon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/6/07, Per Inge Mathisen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/6/07, The Watermelon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > removed the excessive CHECK_DROID at the beginning of
> > > actionUpdateDroid,because it already checks died flag/clear die
On 7/6/07, Per Inge Mathisen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/6/07, The Watermelon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > removed the excessive CHECK_DROID at the beginning of
> actionUpdateDroid,because it already checks died flag/clear died ones.
I do not understand. CHECK_DROID does not check the die
On 7/6/07, The Watermelon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > removed the excessive CHECK_DROID at the beginning of
> actionUpdateDroid,because it already checks died flag/clear died ones.
I do not understand. CHECK_DROID does not check the died flag.
- Per
_
On 7/6/07, The Watermelon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
removed the excessive CHECK_DROID at the beginning of
actionUpdateDroid,because it already checks died flag/clear died ones.
oops forgot to attach the patch.
exdroidcheck.patch
Description: Binary data
_
