register events

[Stefan (metze) Metzmacher]

At 12:51 08.05.2003 +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
>On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 07:19:40AM +0200, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote 
>about 'Re: register events':
> > At 21:45 07.05.2003 +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > >On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 07:19:50PM +0200, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote
> > >about 'Re: register events':
> > >> At 05:44 07.05.2003 +0000, jra at dp.samba.org wrote:
> > >> >On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 07:16:57AM +0200, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher
> > >wrote:
> > >> >> At 05:07 07.05.2003 +0000, jra at dp.samba.org wrote:
>
> > >> >> ok. substitute int with smb_event_id_t
>
> > >> >> but with kind of funtion would you preferr? the first on?
>
> > >> >Yes, if there is only one kind of error (ENOMEM) that
> > >> >can be returned.
>
> > >> In theorie we could run outof event_id's....
>
> > >> Jelmer, what would you preferr?
> > >I would prefer something like this:
>
> > >int smb_register_exit_event(void (*function) (void *data), void
> > >*data);
> > >BOOL smb_unregister_exit_event(int event_id);
>
> > >int smb_register_idle_event(time_t interval = 0, void (*function) (time_t
> > >now, time_t interval, void *data), void *data);
> > >BOOL smb_unregister_idle_event(int event_id);
>
> > Ok, I'm fine with it...
>
> > Should I or will you code that?
>I'm a little busy with my exams right now so I'd be happy if you could
>fix that.

ok



metze
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stefan "metze" Metzmacher <metze at metzemix.de>