On 15.2.2013 20.02, "Tim Roberts" <t...@probo.com> wrote: >Is someone actually coding up a first-draft hotplug solution to do some >experimentation?
I don't no, but I don't think so, there is I believe an implementation from Pete way back. > >There are two ways to design standard libraries. One way is to take >software that someone has been working on and using, clean it up, and >release it. This is the Linux model -- more or less how libusb* has >operated throughout its life. This is also how the original C standard >was created -- they standardized existing practice. I'm all for that. > >The other way is to have design committees debate arcana endlessly for >months at a time, and then once the arcana are settled, go implement >something to the spec. This is the way the C++ standard committees have >worked since the original spec -- specify innovation. Not my cup of tea. > >It looks to me like the current hotplug debate is using the latter >approach. I'm not sure that's a path to success. I don't think there is any debate, just noise, mainly caused by me. Please ignore. > Hotplug is a >minefield; I'm afraid we're going to find that the real world does not >so neatly fit the nice specification. I'm sure that is the cae. br Kusti ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel - in partnership with Geeknet, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials, tech docs, whitepapers, evaluation guides, and opinion stories. Check out the most recent posts - join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ _______________________________________________ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
