Re: [AD] events.c patch

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives ]


On 2008-10-24, Paul Suntsov <siegelords_abode@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > The new behaviour would be redundant:
> > 
> >     al_get_next_event(q, NULL)  == al_drop_next_event
> 
> Not quite, as al_drop_next event does not return a value at this
> point. If you make al_drop_next_event return a bool like all other
> queue functions, then I will agree that all of the functionality will
> be taken care of without altering the current behaviour of the
> functions in the patch. Without this change, it is not possible to
> drop an event, and check whether the queue is empty or not without
> using two functions at once (i.e. al_drop_next_event() followed by a
> al_event_queue_is_empty()). This is not necessary for all other
> functions, so there is an inconsistency there.

I guess I'll change it, but it seems particularly useless.  Why would
you ever drop the head of a queue without knowing what's there?

Peter





Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+ http://listengine.tuxfamily.org/