> With the added comments I think the adc_hardware lib can be published > (my vote is now: 1).
OK, I'll keep it for the release. > I do not agree with your view about the function of samples. > [...] > Anyway, that's the way I would like it. That's the way what I would like too, ideally. For now, samples contain a precious information: what must be declared before including the lib itself. You're right, this should be done within the lib itself. But I keep saying (and warning) that if it's in comments, it's dead. While jallibizing (!) some libs, I've seen this dead code (I mean this happends for real) , and dead code means wrong documentation, which sometime is worth than no doc at all. We need to find a way to put this information, but keep them kind of "alive". Maybe a optional field in headers, strictly formatted so it can be checked. Seb -- Sébastien LELONG http://www.sirloon.net http://sirbot.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
