-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Jochen Roderburg wrote: > I see also a conflict between older changes by Mauro > and the latest changes by Micah in this area.
Actually, I never made any changes to this area that I recall; just merged in changes others made. :) I'm not really sure of how all that works, either. The code was already complicated, and the code from the b20323 branch hasn't helped much in that regard. got_name, AFAICT, is a misnomer anyway, because it tracks more than whether we've simply gotten a name. I'd care a little more about that if I wasn't already planning to rewrite http_loop in the near future. At any rate, though, it looks like the new changes merit a closer look. - -- Micah J. Cowan Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer... http://micah.cowan.name/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG7EMD7M8hyUobTrERCJT/AJ9gmWyHUjclbQNotDmW41kbgebENwCcCJWW Vz50KZDbMDgLDmdkASPFThg= =vJBt -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
