I just don't see the point in creating an 'abstraction' in C. Maybe its just me, but the whole object scheme seems the logical way to do things ESPECIALLY for something like this. I used to dislike C++ about four years ago, then I spent a great deal of time reading and understanding OOP, and now, I find that in a world where you are 'trying' to get component reuse, it helps in many ways. Easier to read code, easier organization, and very clear distinction of outside and inside methods. Is it that this API is to be so simple that an object representation is not necessary? Rick Thursday, June 07, 2001, you wrote: >> >Can you show me: >> >1) a C++ header that show classes and method >> >> the most recent version of the API is in C, and is intended to remain >> that way. JT> Ah, thank you! JT> Just one C lover and C++ hater, JT> Jay Ts
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Paul Davis
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Abramo Bagnara
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Paul Davis
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Abramo Bagnara
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Paul Davis
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Abramo Bagnara
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Paul Davis
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Steve Harris
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Jay Ts
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Rick Burnett
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Abramo Bagnara
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Simon Per Soren Kagedal
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Steve Harris
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Paul Davis
- Re: Re[2]: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ... Jay Ts
- Re: Re[2]: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, ... Alexander Ehlert
- Re[4]: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part... Rick Burnett
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Abramo Bagnara
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] LAAGA proposal, part ?? Steve Harris