> On Aug 24, 2017, at 7:06 AM, Jef Driesen <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2017-08-23 06:43, Dirk Hohndel wrote: >>> On Aug 22, 2017, at 7:55 AM, Jef Driesen <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I don't understand what you gain with those comments. I mean it's just >>> comments. Don't you need this kind of info at runtime instead? >> Yup - I simply have a tool that parses the source to give me the >> information that I want. > > Well, that's a pretty ugly and error-prone hack. You hard-code everything in > the application, based on whatever version that was used at build time (which > may not even be the same as at runtime). But the reason why that table > exists, is to let applications populate the list of supported devices > dynamically at runtime! And by doing it this way, you also depend on some of > the libdivecomputer internals. > > If we're adding this kind of annotations, then I prefer to make this > information available through the api. That will be a lot more useful, and > may also benefit other applications.
That's ok, I didn't expect you to take the changes, which is why I didn't bother sending them to the libdivecomputer mailing list. I needed to get something that worked for our use case, and I needed it soon. /D _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
