I see no reason to keep it c++.
Reduce complexity and overhead. Sounds like a win to me.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
-Original Message-
From: "troy engel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:55:10
To:barry-devel
Subject: [Barry-devel] bcharge: cpp vs c
I was mainly cu
I was mainly curious as to why bcharge was CPP compiled, since the
code itself was just your basic procedural stuff. I wondered "would it
be smaller as c?" and "what about linked libs?" so I played around for
a few secs.
bcharge.cc was easily converted to bcharge.c by replacing the two
'bool' uses
I've been quiet on this so far, but good things don't last forever :)
Greg has, or will, submit the power change part for the inclusion in the
kernel, so bcharge may become a non-issue. With a bit of luck, the whole
driver may become a non-issue (fingers crossed, not holding my breathe).
The power
On 3/21/07, Chris Frey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks. Looks like I can't use iProduct as a way to determine whether
> I'm talking to a Pearl or not. :-(
I would assume that it's the same going forward; 8100, 8800, 83xx, and
so forth. They all have microSD slots, so I would thing the interna
