Re: Compressed text-base patch

* Glenn A. Thompson (gthompson@cdr.net) wrote:
> >
> >
> >IMO, pools define various lifetimes and and scoping. There are times when
> >you want to associate data with that. Not many, so I wouldn't be extremely
> >disappointed to see the userdata totally disappear.
> >
> FWIW, I agree, except that I would be *bummed* if it were to disappear.
> I have a use in mind for it. I posted about it some time ago. I got
> shot down. But I don't give up that easy. So I will just write the
> code when I need it and make my point then;-)

I too would be bummed. I think they're a valuable feature, and my
compressed text base patch would be *much* more complicated without it
(I do still wish they worked more intuitively though).

-- 
Eric Dorland <eric.dorland@mail.mcgill.ca>
ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: hooty@jabber.com
1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C  2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCS d- s++: a-- C+++ UL+++ P++ L++ E++ W++ N+ o K- w+ 
O? M++ V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5++ X+ R tv++ b+++ DI+ D+ 
G e h! r- y+ 
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------