Re: Proposal: changed syntax and semantics for SEND_STOP

[<li...@ba...>]

Hi!

Bengt Martensson "bu...@be..." wrote:
[...]
>>> I would like to change syntax and semantics of the SEND_STOP directive
>>> as follows:
[...]
>>> Proposal: Change to
>>>
>>> SEND_STOP
>>>
>>> without arguments.
>>
>> Any change to the protocol must be backwards compatible.
>> I don't mind dropping the arguments to SEND_STOP, but lircd must still
>> accept them when given.

> It does accept all the old arguments, it just does not evaluate (or
> require) them.

Yes, you're right.
How about changing it like this:
The arguments are still evaluated if given.

Christoph

===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/lirc/lirc/daemons/lircd.c,v
retrieving revision 5.88
diff -u -u -r5.88 lircd.c
--- lircd.c     19 Jul 2009 09:12:51 -0000      5.88
+++ lircd.c     4 Aug 2009 17:37:44 -0000
@@ -1605,10 +1605,10 @@

        if(parse_rc(fd,message,arguments,&remote,&code,NULL,2)==0) return(0);

-       if(remote==NULL || code==NULL) return(1);
        if(repeat_remote && repeat_code &&
-          strcasecmp(remote->name,repeat_remote->name)==0 &&
-          strcasecmp(code->name,repeat_code->name)==0)
+          (remote == NULL || code == NULL ||
+           (strcasecmp(remote->name,repeat_remote->name)==0 &&
+            strcasecmp(code->name,repeat_code->name)==0)))
        {
                int done;