From 3385e9ba4aee0dd4bb00c8bd773050bbedc2603b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Michael Bayne Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2008 16:52:19 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] It's not entirely obvious how we should respond to multiple calls to logoff() fired in such rapid succession that we have not completed processing the first call before the next one comes in. We could do the cumbersome thing and keep track of an _isLoggingOff state but that is so inelegant that I can't bear to do it. I'd rather just cope in the Presents code and put the onus on the caller not to do wacky things like this. git-svn-id: svn+ssh://src.earth.threerings.net/narya/trunk@5296 542714f4-19e9-0310-aa3c-eee0fc999fb1 --- src/java/com/threerings/presents/client/Client.java | 6 ++++-- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/java/com/threerings/presents/client/Client.java b/src/java/com/threerings/presents/client/Client.java index a9c618f21..8030b2e81 100644 --- a/src/java/com/threerings/presents/client/Client.java +++ b/src/java/com/threerings/presents/client/Client.java @@ -503,8 +503,10 @@ public class Client } // kill our tick interval - _tickInterval.cancel(); - _tickInterval = null; + if (_tickInterval != null) { + _tickInterval.cancel(); + _tickInterval = null; + } // ask the communicator to send a logoff message and disconnect from the server _comm.logoff();