On 10/9/06, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 06 October 2006 7:00 pm, Christopher "Monty" Montgomery wrote: > So?
I hand you a pointer to memory and ask you what type it is. You can't tell me. You have to have the pointer *to the parent* to tell. It's not a show-stopper; obviously the code as we have it works. It's just a complication at every step, and it also means that you have to have helper functions to even enforce typing loosely. You can't even walk the tree via dereference; you have to call helper functions to do even that. It's just an addiitonal layer of complexity and resources on every operation that accesses the hardware schedule. Reducing pervasive complexity, even low level, is generally very useful. You cared enough to reindent, right? :-) > People do sometimes have that reaction to hardware-level typed pointers. > But it's not like there's a real option ... Right, there's no option in the hardware schedule. But piggybacking the shadow schedule's typed private data onto the hardware schedule structures imposes the typed pointers on every aspect of the code. Monty ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
