Carsten Dominik <address@hidden> writes:
this looks like an OK patch and I don't have any problems applying
it.
However, I do not quite understand the need for it. Can you please
try to explain a bit better? Do you have two processes running over
the same file at the same time, or why is there a conflict?
My dblock-write function calls url-retrieve, to asynchronously
retrieve an
HTML page. The callback function I pass to url-retrieve will then
fill
in the information I need into the dynamic block.
So in the following case:
* Find start of dblock 1, store as pos
* Make HTTP request for dblock 1
* Go back to pos
* Find end of dblock 1
* Find start of dblock 2, store as pos
* Make HTTP request for dblock 2
* Asynchronous event: HTTP response for dblock 1 arrives, insert
lots of
data in dblock 1
* Go back to pos
* Find end of dblock 2
the last step will actually find the end of dblock 1, if the amount of
data inserted in dblock 1 is great enough that pos suddenly points
inside it. (Then it will of course find dblock 2 again, request its
HTML
page again, and thus insert the data twice.)
An equivalent fix would be to make pos a marker instead.