Hi Michael,
Am 06/06/2011 02:10 PM, schrieb Laurent Gauch:
>/ Yes, this is to decouple the open and init (open the handle, init
/>/ the associated specific layout).
/
Is there case where open is used without init, or init without open?
Actually no. But in the ft2232.c we could have the possibility to only
re-init a device+layout without the need to close open the handle.
Sure this will be useful when the ft2232.c will provide the possibility
to init for 'JTAG only' or init for 'SWD only' on a already opened
handle of the device. No ?
Otherwise, this is just unnecessarily complex.
>/ (more smaller function ... as good OO coding !)
/>/
/>/ The ft2232_init_sub(void) and ft2232_init() could be merged again in a
/>/ ft2232_open if needed
/>/
/>/ But yes, we have all different point of view regarding what is open
/>/ what is init ...
/>/
/>/ The objective is to have something like :
/>/
/>/ open
/>/ init
/>/ deinit
/>/ close
/>/
/>/ and not as the actual
/>/ init
/>/ quit
/
open/close instead of init/quit is OK with me, but what is the advantage
of the 4-function API instead of the old 2-function API?
Now I understand . You are thinking we want to change the API of the
interface. NO NO NO .
We just want to decouple the open close handle and the init deinit
device + layout INSIDE the ft2232.c.
See the patch, we do not rename the quit() init(), we do not touch the
API concept !
cu
Michael
Laurent
http://www.amontec.com
http://www.amontec.com/jtagkey.shtml
_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
