Am Mittwoch, den 17.08.2005, 23:34 +0200 schrieb Martin Wehner: > I dunno, but this strikes me as a pretty convoluted way of implementing > it. I mean, 3 new function types and a function with 8 arguments that > does the opposite of what the name claims because one of the arguments > inverts the result? And as a side-effect you end up with the name of the > handler to filter in 3 different places. Do you have anything special in > mind with this über-generic architecture? Yeah, it sucked. > How about the attached, simplified version? Looks almost exactly like the thing I wrote some minutes ago. Once in a while, I should really not only try to get the gist of an email but also read it carefully as a whole. -- Christian Neumair <chris gnome-de org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part