From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4286 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2004 17:53:04 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 22 Jan 2004 17:53:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 24633 invoked by alias); 22 Jan 2004 17:52:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 19390 Received: (qmail 24597 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2004 17:52:55 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO sunsite.dk) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 22 Jan 2004 17:52:55 -0000 X-MessageWall-Score: 0 (sunsite.dk) Received: from [62.189.58.19] by sunsite.dk (MessageWall 1.0.8) with SMTP; 22 Jan 2004 17:52:54 -0000 Received: from MAILSWEEPER01.csr.com (mailhost1.csr.com [62.189.183.235]) by lhuumrelay3.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id i0MHqsv07011 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 17:52:54 GMT Received: from EXCHANGE02.csr.com (unverified [192.168.137.45]) by MAILSWEEPER01.csr.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.12) with ESMTP id for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 17:52:42 +0000 Received: from csr.com ([192.168.144.127]) by EXCHANGE02.csr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Thu, 22 Jan 2004 17:55:05 +0000 cc: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk (Zsh hackers list) Subject: Re: PATCH: strftime -s In-reply-to: "Peter Stephenson"'s message of "Thu, 22 Jan 2004 17:28:10 GMT." <21397.1074792490@csr.com> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 17:52:53 +0000 Message-ID: <470.1074793973@csr.com> From: Peter Stephenson X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Jan 2004 17:55:05.0325 (UTC) FILETIME=[DDCA39D0:01C3E110] Peter Stephenson wrote: > It also fixes a bug that the EPOCHSECONDS wasn't unset when the module > was unloaded, which could have nasty effects. There ought to be > something in the development guide about this. (Ideally, there ought to > be an easier way of removing module parameters --- it's a bit hairy at > the moment.) grrr... I'm telling me... EPOCHSECONDS didn't have an unsetfn, so still crashed when the module was unloaded. Should we guard against this? It's odd that readonly variables need an unsetfn (though I think it's reasonable that you need to explicitly remove the readonly flag when unsetting). Committed with that change. -- Peter Stephenson Software Engineer CSR Ltd., Science Park, Milton Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WH, UK Tel: +44 (0)1223 692070 ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com **********************************************************************