Yeah, in reading the code I see everything is consistent.
r1147314 should make this confusing less likely in the future.
Stefan Fuhrmann wrote on Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 22:19:37 +0200:
> On 05.07.2011 00:01, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> >stef...@apache.org wrote on Sat, Jul 02, 2011 at 10:20:57 -0000:
> >>+++ subversion/branches/svn_mutex/subversion/libsvn_subr/svn_mutex.c Sat
> >>Jul 2 10:20:56 2011
> >>@@ -27,19 +27,19 @@
> >> /* Destructor to be called as part of the pool cleanup procedure. */
> >> static apr_status_t uninit(void *data)
> >> {
> >>- svn_mutex__t *mutex = data;
> >>- mutex->mutex = NULL;
> >>+ svn_mutex__t **mutex = data;
> >>+ *mutex = NULL;
> >>
> >Is this change is correct? Looking at other pool cleanup handlers (eg
> >the ones in libsvn_subr/error.c), their void * argument is an
> >'svn_error_t *', not a pointer-to-pointer...
> Yes, this is "unusual" but correct. We provide
> MUTEX as parameter to the cleanup, which is
> a double pointer (while apr_mutex is only an
> ordinary pointer).
>
> The example you cite (make_error_internal)
> nowhere uses double indirection.
>
> -- Stefan^2.
