Hi Dave, > > PS: I don't like this comment change: > > > > * This can be used by drivers to release an interface without waiting > > ... > > + * for their disconnect() methods to be called. In most cases this also > > + * causes the driver disconnect() method to be called. > > * > > > > "In most cases" is too vague. What is someone who needs to rely on > > having disconnect() called supposed to think? How about this: > > What are they supposed to do? Use the source to answer detailed > questions; use testing and code review to to improve quality. > > > * This can be used by drivers to release an interface without waiting > > * for their disconnect() methods to be called. It causes disconnect > > * to be called, except possibly when used from a probe() method. > > But that's not the only case when it wouldn't be called.
What other cases are there? > My own > experience in specifying APIs suggests to me rather strongly that > these oddball cases aren't worth nailing down in natural language > at this time. > > - Dave Duncan. ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
