Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hpcc01!hpbbn!hpbbi4!stefan
From: stefan@hpbbi4.HP.COM (#Stefan Bachert)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Behavior of wind_update() question.
Message-ID: <510008@hpbbi4.HP.COM>
Date: 5 Jun 90 11:21:46 GMT
References: <1990Jun3.034757.13857@chinet.chi.il.us>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard GmbH
Lines: 17

/ hpbbi4:comp.sys.atari.st / saj@chinet.chi.il.us (Stephen Jacobs) /  5:47 am  Jun  3, 1990 /
> Will someone who knows please tell me whether multiple calls to wind_update()
> with the argument BEG_UPDATE (which I think equals 1) are un-done by a
> single call with the argument END_UPDATE (I think 0), or with the same 
> number of calls.  For that matter, do multiple successive calls of this
> function with the same argument have any bad effect?  

You have to un-done each BEG_UPDATE with one END_UPDATE
If you give more END_UPDATE than BEQ_UPDATE GEM/AES will crash!
Only since TOS 1.4 exists a method to cancel all BEG_UPDATES.
I don't know off hand what the calls name is.

Stefan

                                > Steve J.
> d8
----------