On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 08:37:27PM -0800, Ping wrote: > On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 8:20 PM, Peter Hutterer > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 08:05:00PM -0800, Ping wrote: > > > Is there a reason that the followings are not removed? > > > > > > common->wcmMaxX = 0; /* max digitizer logical X value > > */ > > > common->wcmMaxY = 0; /* max digitizer logical Y value > > */ > > > > hehe, well spotted :) > > > > they are followed by the definition of common->wcmMaxTouchX = 1024 and the > > same for Y. I left them there as an explicit signal that wcmMaxX/Y have a > > different default wcmMaxTouchX/Y > > > > > tool->next = NULL; /* next tool in list */ > > > area->next = NULL; /* next area in list */ > > > > both are linked lists and the ->next = NULL serves as an signal that it's a > > null-terminated list from the start. > > > > This is personal preference/style, I can remove both if you want to to be > > more consistent with the zero/NULL removals. > > > I don't have a personal preference. Either way works for me. However, you > may want to keep the following in to make it consistent within the scope. > > - priv->next = NULL;
oops, yes, of course. will merge it in, thanks. Cheers, Peter ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Return on Information: Google Enterprise Search pays you back Get the facts. http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Linuxwacom-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxwacom-devel
