2009/9/22 Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de>:
> Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>
>> I seen your commits.
>> So, as i understand, your changes makes sure that delay can be
>> scheduled only once at some point of time.
>
> Yes, that is the way it has always been.
>
>> This surely makes things more predictable, but limits the use cases :(
>
> Well, it's easy enough to create another delay isn't it? I can't really see
> a use-case that would *require* sharing the same delay across multiple
> processes.
>

Its ok as to me.
I'm just making a difference between things which just working, and
things which working perfectly,
without any doubts :)


> Cheers,
>  - Andreas
>
>



-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.