On Tuesday 24 June 2008, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On Tue, June 24, 2008 1:04 am, Andreas Schulz wrote:

> In the delete_* functions, I'd use a more descriptive name for the
> parameter than "garbage", e.g.:
>
> void delete_key_names(char **key_names);
> ...
> So, perhaps simply say this instead:
> >  * Memory allocated for the strings must be freed by the caller
> >  * via destroy_key_names() when no longer needed.

done.

> int get_key_names(uint8_t *data, uint32_t size,
>     char *** key_names, uint32_t *key_names_length);

I had considered this, but somehow the triple '***' made me a little
nervous to rewrite everything once again. Well, eventually I did
now, and the API now really looks much better.

> One could make a similar change to encode_for_posting, but since that's
> always returning just one string, I'm not worried about that so much; your
> call.

Changed that also - adds consistency to the API to make all functions
return status and write to parameters. The low-level function in web.cpp
already worked that way anyway...

I got the C parts mostly done - just allow for a few days for testing 
and building also for Windows (and splitting the patch into the learnig
and the irremotes part...).

> I would rename post_new_code's "code" parameter to "encoded", to hint that
> it comes from encode_for_posting.
>
> Thanks for implementing this guys, and being open to API changes.

You're welcome... that's the good thing about writing open source software -
no boss sitting behind your back and counting the hours you need to get 
the job done...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
_______________________________________________
concordance-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/concordance-devel

Reply via email to