Re: buildable interface testers error

On Oct 26, 2008, at 7:06 AM, Torsten Schoenfeld wrote:

We could check that the interface is actually registered before calling _ADD_INTERFACE, as in the attached patch. Does this make sense? muppet?

The obvious scenario that comes to mind is a hosed registration order. Is there any value in worrying about deferred initialization? I don't think so, as you're typically doing instantiation after initialization has finished, but we have ways of breaking that assumption.

But i think the warning is a good idea. It gives the author a hint that the initialization order may be hosed.

Diane, ten-oh-three, Great Northern Hotel.
Sheriff Truman and I have just been with the one-armed man, or what's left of him. In another time, another culture, he may have been a seer, or a shaman priest, but in our world, he's a shoe salesman, and lives among the shadows.
-- Special Agent Dale Cooper

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]