Gunnar Roth wrote: > Klaus Schmidinger wrote: > >> Stefan Huelswitt wrote: >> >>> On 13 Aug 2005 Klaus Schmidinger <Klaus.Schmidinger@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>>> Fixed a race condition in cTransfer (thanks to Klaus ??? for >>>> reporting this one). >>>> In doing so, the 'active' variables used by the actual derived >>>> cThread classes >>>> have been replaced by the cThread::Active() function. The previous >>>> functionality >>>> of cThread::Active() has been moved into the new cThread::Running(). >>>> Plugin authors should check their derived cThread classes and >>>> replace any 'active' >>>> variables the same way as, for instance, done in transfer.c. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Wouldn't it be better to leave Active() untouched (instead of >>> renaming to Running()) and create a new (differently named) >>> function for the active var replacement? (e.g. Continue(), which >>> would give good readability with while(Continue())) >> >> >> >> Well, Active() reflects the internal 'active' variable, so >> Continue() would have to correspond to 'continue', which is >> a reserved keyword... >> > What has the name of a method to do with te name of a internal variable? Well, nothing, technically - it's just that I like to do it that way. Now, before you start dissecting VDR and showing me places where I did it differently, let's just end this here ;-) >>> This would limit the impact this change has to plugins. >>> >>> Otherwise a plugins using Active() now, could compile fine with >>> the next VDR version, but certainly wouldn't work correctly. >> >> >> >> Is there any plugin that actually uses cThread::Active()? > > > /In the vbox plugin i use some code from mp3 plugin and there i have a > Active() call which simply returns active member of cTrhead. > > IMO what stfean huelswitt says , is right. Ok, I give up. I'll leave the old Active() function as it was and call the new one something like Continue() or so. I won't call it Terminate() or anyting that requires an extra negation, though. Now, with the naming problem settled, are there any actual, technical issues with this modification? Klaus
