Right, I remember my original implementation had the same behaviour, but I'm pretty sure I had a comment mentioning that in the function usage comment. I'm just saying it should be mentioned what passing NULL means (especially since we do it all over the place).
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Diego Novillo <dnovi...@google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 13:56, Gabriel Charette <gch...@google.com> wrote: >> I like this implementation! >> Only one thing, if we ACTUALLY want "to_register" NULL instead of the read >> value we can't as in your current implementation NULL means don't do the >> alternate registration. > > I don't think that's a problem. Note too that the original > implementation also treated NULL to mean "don't do alternate > registration". > > > Diego. >
