libftdi Archives

Subject: RE: Should ftdi_read_data_submit_to() be a new call?

From: "Michael Plante" <michael.plante@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <libftdi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 22:40:33 -0400
Thomas Jarosch wrote:
>> On Friday, 1. April 2011 15:43:57 Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> > I just feel that the function name ftdi_read_data_submit_to()
>> > sounds a bit strange. Maybe  ftdi_read_data_submit_with_timeout()
>> > is better.
>> >
>> > On the other hand, probably changing arguments of
ftdi_read_data_submit()
>> > to include the timeout is better.
>>
>> +1 to include the timeout in the original function
>> as libftdi-1.0 is still unreleased / "unstable".

Dunno what to say about libftdi-1.0, but my concern was with
libftdi-0.1/git, which still doesn't seem to have 3b92d47 reverted.

Thanks,
Michael



--
libftdi - see http://www.intra2net.com/en/developer/libftdi for details.
To unsubscribe send a mail to libftdi+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx   

Current Thread