>> >> otoh, perhaps you mean like this (rather contrived) call path:
>> >
>> >No, I'm just looking at it from an interface point of view.
>> 
>> understood.  all i'm trying to do here is talk you out of expending
>> the effort of reworking the amap_extend() interface.  actually, if you
>> were to do that, i'd suggest that instead of adding a new argument,
>> you should alter the "forwards" argument (of which only one bit is
>> used) to be the flags argument, and put your WAIT/NOWAIT bits in
>> there.
>
>OK, so what about the attached change ?

that looks pretty.  :)

-- 
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
codewarrior@daemon.org             * "ah!  i see you have the internet
twofsonet@graffiti.com (Andrew Brown)                that goes *ping*!"
werdna@squooshy.com       * "information is power -- share the wealth."