PATCH: Re: talloc -- Eureka*

[Sam Liddicott]

* tridge wrote, On 29/07/09 07:37:
> Hi Sam,
> 
>  > Perhaps we'll call it talloc_sticky_reference and
>  > #define talloc_slippy_reference _talloc_reference
>  > #define talloc_reference talloc_reference_is_too_dangerous_for_you
> 
> no, please just the function you want by a new name and don't do
> anything to the old call.
> 
> Cheers, Tridge

Attached are some "talking about" patches.

If the approach is suitable then I'll rework them based on Metze's
edition of my patches in his WIP tree.

The first patch adds talloc_reference_sticky and
talloc_increase_ref_count_sticky

The second patch tries to bring in Tridges patch.
It adds a function slippy_ref; Tridge had been adding warnings/failures
on tc->refs != NULL.

I replace this with slippy_ref(tc) which returns the first non-sticky
ref from tc->refs.

If there are more than one non-sticky parent, then Tridge's code will
fail as he likes.

Coders who avoid the old slippy references don't need to worry about
talloc_free failing.

I think non-sticky references are an abomination, but I'm glad that now
any sticky references I take will be safe.

Sam