>>>>> On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 10:56:44 -0400, "Bell, Adam" said:

AB> The problem I see is that the request->processed flag applied to the
AB> loop iteration "request" and each varbaind attached to it, so I can mark
AB> the request as processed but it does not directly impact the following
AB> requests in the list or the varbinds on those requests. Thus, the other
AB> varbinds that were just handled would be handled again.

Ahh... missed something in there. I was thinking you were talking
about GET requests.

For SETs, there is a long standing issue of needing to deal with
checking individual values, acting on individual values and checking on
all values in combination (including both new and old) and then acting
on all values at once.

One way you can handle this is to actually put the for(request = ...)
loop inside a mode check. That way you can do:

case reserve2:
for(request = ...) {
check that each individual value is legal
}
check that the group as a whole is legal

case action
for(request = ...) {
maybe act on each value individually
}
put all the values into place as a group

In fact, it's this sort of fine-grained processing that made rstory
write the whole baby-steps helper...
--
Wes Hardaker
Sparta, Inc.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
Use priority code J8TL2D2.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757...un.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/...et-snmp-coders