On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 09:27 +0000, Patrick Ohly wrote: > Hi! > > Another question around this: suspending is done so that we wait until > we have a message to process, then tell the engine to suspend with > STEPCMD_SUSPEND, afterwards directly call it again with STEPCMD_GOTDATA. > > But in the TransportAgent::FAILED case there is also a stepCmd = > STEPCMD_SUSPEND, which bypasses that logic. Does that really work?
Looking at ObexTransportAgent and SoupTransportAgent I see that they only abort a send when, well, "abort" is requested. "Suspend" doesn't affect message sending, as intended. The code mentioned above which checks for suspend is therefore redundant. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. _______________________________________________ SyncEvolution mailing list [email protected] http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution
