Re: Talarm() problem

[Andreas Schwab <schwab@issan.informatik.uni-dortmund.de>]

ersmith@netcom.com (Eric R. Smith) writes:

|> I think that checking for the timeout having expired before calling
|> canceltimeout would be safer than not freeing the timeout structure,
|> since the "sticky" timeout structure could lead to memory leaks if
|> canceltimeout() is never called.

I don't think this is a problem, since terminate() calls
cancelalltimeouts() which can take care of the expired timeouts. I'm
currently testing a scheme where checkalarms() just puts the expired
timeout on a expire_list which is examined by canceltimeout(), where
it is finally passed to disposetimeout(). This should be pretty safe.

-- 
Andreas Schwab                                      "And now for something
schwab@ls5.informatik.uni-dortmund.de                completely different"