Kevin wrote
"...chan_sip would be the best candidate for conversion to bitfield-based flags, instead of macro-based flags"
but the macros are there to manipulate the bitfields. What am I missing?
----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin P. Fleming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Asterisk Developers Mailing List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Dev] Patching flags to bitfield structs
Rob Gagnon wrote:under which version of Asterisk are you talking?
CVS HEAD
chan_sip.c for example in CVS is already full of "flagified" code (using the "flags" member of the structs)
Right.
Do you mean to extend that? or are you reading old source code (pre 1.0.4)
that does not have that
No, the point of my response was that chan_sip would be the best candidate for conversion to bitfield-based flags, instead of macro-based flags.
_______________________________________________
Asterisk-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
_______________________________________________ Asterisk-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
