>> Having a structure certainly reduces possible coding errors, but in
>> the end there is still a cast from one type to another, something
>> that disables type checking on the compiler level.
>
> The hooks are static, aren't they? Otherwise, how do you plan to
> document them?
Not sure what
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 2:35 PM Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>
>
> > [...], after this commit, I am not abusing it to set pointer to
> > code. I am abusing it to set a structure of four function pointers.
> >
> > Let me know if your concerns remain the same with this change.
>
> His concerns stay the
>
> His concerns stay the same. He doesn't like `multi-purpose' API calls
> that do more than a single thing, and which use casts to various types
> like the mentioned `ioctl' function. Having a structure certainly
> reduces possible coding errors, but in the end there is still a cast
> from one
> [...], after this commit, I am not abusing it to set pointer to
> code. I am abusing it to set a structure of four function pointers.
>
> Let me know if your concerns remain the same with this change.
His concerns stay the same. He doesn't like `multi-purpose' API calls
that do more than a
> For all I see you are throwing out type safety and things that compiler and
> linker can check for, to gain nothing. "Fewer API" is not a goal. It
> shouldn't be. Why don't we move ALL API into that one call?!
Notwithstanding, the third alternative is dedicated separate renderer
> I have improved trace comments and added functions to handle most
> (hopefully all) cases from the WOFF2 recommendation. Please test!
Will do that soon, thanks!
Some minor comments to the code.
* In API header documentation blocks (even the internal ones) please
replace `foo' with `foo` or
