Am Montag, 21. April 2008 22:49 schrieb chromatic: > On Monday 21 April 2008 13:44:44 Patrick R. Michaud wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 04:38:52PM -0400, Bob Rogers wrote: > > > > Thanks again. I was misreading from comments in stack_push, which > > say that it pushes things onto the "generic stack" when in reality > > it seems to use whatever stack is passed into it. > > To be fair, it's not even a stack. It's a graph that's usually acyclical. > If it were a stack, I wouldn't have had to add the refcounting to see when > we can free chunks.
As there seems to still exist old (stack) cruft in the code base, it's probably ok to just denote it with a line of code reference, making the culprit easily grepable. > -- c leo
