Hello Laurent :-) Thank you for your input and good words :-) Glad we agree here, also that this is a lot of work to be done, this is why I prefer to ask and plan first :-)
We can use simple name "Core" no problem :-) Regarding the C++ there should be a bigger discussion and maybe some analysis of what are the advantages of C over C++ and vice versa and we can choose better solution... C is simple and fast, and the work can be done with C, there are some people that want it done in C, so we would have to present very strong arguments to use C++ I guess... what are the real code size and speed differences? I dont think there is any problem with numbering as most people know why they use OpenOCD :-) But I like the user convenience approach :-) Maybe it is time to bump the current version to 1.0.0 and start new work as 2.0.0? It can cause some mess however, so I guess I can work on 1.0.0 as development release available only via git and when its ready we can make a release to the public... Best regards! :-) Tomek -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS, MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft MVPs and experts. SALE $99.99 this month only -- learn more at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122412 _______________________________________________ OpenOCD-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openocd-devel
