From 58777ff0d70fe48b954ce72be5d82b5efb2f07fd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: NiLuJe <ninuje@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 00:26:06 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Yeah, no, reverse iter wouldn't work.

---
 frontend/ui/uimanager.lua | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/frontend/ui/uimanager.lua b/frontend/ui/uimanager.lua
index 1a5a07793..00c33cba5 100644
--- a/frontend/ui/uimanager.lua
+++ b/frontend/ui/uimanager.lua
@@ -1167,8 +1167,8 @@ function UIManager:_checkTasks()
             local task = table.remove(self._task_queue, 1)
             -- ...so do it now.
             -- NOTE: Said task's action might modify _task_queue.
-            --       To avoid race conditions, we only ever check the head of the queue (c.f., #1758).
-            -- FIXME: Switch to a less confusing reverse for #len loop?
+            --       To avoid race conditions and catch new upcoming tasks during this call,
+            --       we repeatedly check the head of the queue (c.f., #1758).
             task.action(unpack(task.args, 1, task.argc))
         else
             -- As the queue is sorted in ascending order, it's safe to assume all items are currently future tasks.