This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: [SetupXP] The two styles for handling activation refusal
- From: "Morrison, John" <John dot Morrison at uk dot experian dot com>
- To: "'cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com'" <cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 08:32:11 +0100
- Subject: RE: [SetupXP] The two styles for handling activation refusal
Robert Collins wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-07-21 at 04:17, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
>>> Unless there will ever be a need to ask a page whether
>>> it would take activation in the future, but not activate it
>>> immediately, even if it is possible to do so, I think the 2 calls
>>> should be merged. Will there ever be such a case?
>> I cannot think of one. It exists soley to give OnActivate a
>> "default return code". It *can't* be called anywhere else, since in
>> the general case, OnAcceptActivation won't know if it needs to
>> refuse activation until after OnAccept is called.
> Hmm. My intention when I suggested a query method was for it to be
> called *instead* of OnActivate, and OnActivate only called if it
> returned true.
> Will doing that break anything?
> For clarity:
> if (OnAcceptActivate())
Hi guys :)
be better? (although the OnXXX functions always make me think that
they should be callbacks.)
Information in this email and any attachments are confidential, and may
not be copied or used by anyone other than the addressee, nor disclosed
to any third party without our permission. There is no intention to
create any legally binding contract or other commitment through the use
of this email.
Experian Limited (registration number 653331).
Registered office: Talbot House, Talbot Street, Nottingham NG1 5HF