[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [bug-mailutils] Merging libraries (was Re: Mailutils 0.3 released)
From: |
Sergey Poznyakoff |
Subject: |
Re: [bug-mailutils] Merging libraries (was Re: Mailutils 0.3 released) |
Date: |
Thu, 20 Feb 2003 13:03:54 +0200 |
> I do not quite understand the answer, your are saying you do not
> want to do this, because it is incompatible to the old way?
No, not quite so. I agree that using message_unref is a good idea
(I'd only propose to call it message_destroy for consistency).
What I meant is that its use should not be mandatory, i.e.
both of the following should be allowed:
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
mailbox_get_message(mbox, &msg);
...
message_unref(msg);
}
and
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
mailbox_get_message(mbox, &msg);
...
}
The latter example will result in using more memory, however it
will be reclaimed after calling mailbox_destroy().
In short:
1) mailbox_get_message retrieves a pointer to the data allocated under
mailbox_t.
2) Calling mailbox_get_message(mbox, 2, &msg) several times is not an
error and does not result in allocating more memory. It only
increments the reference count associated with `msg'.
3) Calling message_destroy(&msg) decrements the reference count. If
the count falls to zero, it frees all allocated resources and notifies
the owner object (mailbox_t) about the fact. Subsequent invocation of
mailbox_get_message results in allocating new object for that message.
Does this sound reasonable?
Regards,
Sergey
- [bug-mailutils] Mailutils 0.3 released, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2003/02/16
- Re: [bug-mailutils] Mailutils 0.3 released, Alain Magloire, 2003/02/17
- [bug-mailutils] Merging libraries (was Re: Mailutils 0.3 released), Sergey Poznyakoff, 2003/02/18
- Re: [bug-mailutils] Merging libraries (was Re: Mailutils 0.3 released), Alain Magloire, 2003/02/18
- Message not available
- Re: [bug-mailutils] Merging libraries (was Re: Mailutils 0.3 released), Sergey Poznyakoff, 2003/02/19
- Re: [bug-mailutils] Merging libraries (was Re: Mailutils 0.3 released), Alain Magloire, 2003/02/19
- Message not available
- Re: [bug-mailutils] Merging libraries (was Re: Mailutils 0.3 released),
Sergey Poznyakoff <=
- Re: [bug-mailutils] Merging libraries (was Re: Mailutils 0.3, Alain Magloire, 2003/02/20
- Re: [bug-mailutils] Merging libraries (was Re: Mailutils 0.3, Alain Magloire, 2003/02/24
- Message not available
- Re: [bug-mailutils] Merging libraries, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2003/02/25
- Message not available
- Re: [bug-mailutils] Merging libraries (was Re: Mailutils 0.3, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2003/02/25
- Re: [bug-mailutils] Merging libraries (was Re: Mailutils 0.3, Alain Magloire, 2003/02/25