[crossfire] safe/common item stack/inventory iteration?

[Andreas Kirschbaum]

Andreas Kirschbaum wrote:
> Mark Wedel wrote:
> > Andreas Kirschbaum wrote:
> > > [collect deleted objects and defer actual deletion]
> >
> > But to do that, yet another set of object pointers is needed (or
> > perhaps use teh objectlink structure) - you can't use the
> > next/above/below pointers, because if you mess with those, you now
> > have a case where the pointers don't point to expected data, which is
> > the entire problem we are running into.
>
> Sorry, I implicitly meant a new linked list. We probably need just a
> plain linked list but no double linked list. Therefore an objectlink
> list probably is the way to go since this does not increase the object
> size by adding a pointer which almost always is NULL.

After reading Nicolas' latest mail, I realize that this solution will not work:
we now could handle deleted objects but not objects moved between lists.

Of course, we could use the same idea when moving objects (defer the move and
actually move them afterwards). But I'm not anymore sure if this would solve
all possible issues...


Andreas