From: Rafael L. <lab...@ps...> - 2003-02-05 15:29:57
|
* Alan W. Irwin <ir...@be...> [2003-02-05 06:59]: > I assume you are talking about your new code here. For the old code the > numbers had to be unique Not necessarily. In the old code, the entries were sorted using the seq filed of the PLDispatchtable entries using qsort. This means that, when two drivers claim the same number, of of them will (randomly) get first in the list. However, it is guaranteed that they will appear both before (above) drivers with greater (lesser) sequence numbers. This is way I see this sequence number as a kind of "priority level". > (and seqnum was 6 for the gnome driver). Right, I thought I had put "1" in the past. > Of course, that was a maintenance burden so if they just become non-unique > priority numbers now, that is a significant improvement. This is exactly the idea behind my last proposal. -- Rafael |