On 12/11/06, Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The translation rules between the two interfaces are very simple, and documented in the header file. So I don't think that's a big issue in practice.
Sure... It like learing that on Windows integer is DWORD, and pointer is PBYTE. It is easy... But lets say I develop for Winows and use uint instead of DWORD... Now someone else takes over...
Also, I have spent quite some time on this already, at some point one has to stop doing it over and over again. Of course, you are free to do this if you feel strong about it, I might even adopt it. I will certainly not mind if your file ends up diverging from my silly mixed interface solution :) I would probably take your stance as well if I were in your position.
Well... I think that every issue should be solved separately. If you want to introduce free PKCS#11 header, provide it... -> pkcs11.h. If you want to introduce convention rename, provide it... -> pkcs11g.h (which includes pkcs11.h) These are two separate issue, thus should be divided into two solutions. Just like you divide functionality among modules. I don't want you to remove your code, or be convinced that it is better to work with the spec nameing conventions... Just to split this into two files which uses each other. We already forked PKCS#11 once... I don't think it will be wise for me to fork it again, only to remove some constants... But I really think dividing it will provide a cleaner approach. Best Regards, Alon Bar-Lev. _______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
