Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev <at> redhat.com> writes: > > On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 10:16:05 +0100, "A.P.Munnikes" <munnikes <at> xs4all.nl> wrote: > > > <at> <at> -1021,6 +1024,8 <at> <at> > > > > if ((epd->bmAttributes&USB_ENDPOINT_XFERTYPE_MASK)!= > > USB_ENDPOINT_XFER_BULK) > > + if ((usblp->quirks & USBLP_QUIRK_IGNORE_ENDPOINT_TYPE) > > + == 0) > > continue; > > I would like to leave the determination of merits of adding the quirk itself > to Vojtech, but IMHO, if you have to break lines in this way it is a sign > that you have to think about refactoring of procedures. Huh? It may be a sign that the name of the quirk is a bit too long. I don't see any other problem with it. Maybe you could explain a bit more, Pete....? ~Randy
------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
