Tim Roberts wrote:
> It's interesting you would call this "push style";
You're right, my bad- that should read "pull style".
> I don't see the point of the added complexity of the event count, which
> would be outdated as soon as it was returned. Why not just:
> libusb_transfer * transfer;
>
Wolfgang Pupp wrote:
> I've been working with libusbx for some time now --I'm primarily very
> happy with it-- but one design trait gave me trouble: Being forced to
> use C-callbacks for dealing with asynchronous transfers.
> It would be *really* nice if there was a "push style" API one could
> res
I've been working with libusbx for some time now --I'm primarily very
happy with it-- but one design trait gave me trouble: Being forced to
use C-callbacks for dealing with asynchronous transfers.
It would be *really* nice if there was a "push style" API one could
resort to, like this:
/* insid
