On 2012.08.29 10:34, Xiaofan Chen wrote: > The flags are there for a reason. So maybe it is > a good idea to provide an API for the users to choose > the option. Probably for next libusb 1.1... " > > On the other hand, such API will have some platform > specific options and some people may not like this kind > of API.
IMO, we have quite a few good reasons (i.e. actual user requests) to want some form of platform specific extensions in our API, be it to set OS specific parameters or to report significant platform info (cf. open issues #20 [1] and #24 [2]). We've debated this in the past, and bar a few purists, who IMO seem to forget that Linux already introduced such platform specific calls with detach_kernel_driver(), I think the consensus is that the benefits for our users will be far greater than whatever considerations we may have for a "pure" abstracted API. I doubt I'm the only one who'd prefer an API that solves actual problems, such as setting platform specific preferences, over an API that's been over sanitized for the sake of abstraction. Regards, /Pete [1] https://github.com/libusbx/libusbx/issues/20 [2] https://github.com/libusbx/libusbx/issues/24 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
