On 07/09/2014 06:46 PM, Nathan Scott wrote:
Hi Dave,
I got the impression earlier that you were expecting more parameters to
be needed down the track, and that strings would not be ideal...? (like
the "interrupted" parameter). If that's not the case and we can get
rid of that extra parameter, lets keep it simple and go back to strings
as you suggest.
My fault for being unclear, in that case. I just meant that I expected
new features to be added to the API. I don't see a way to get rid of the
'interrupted' parameter other than to make it a byte in one of the
stings (yuck, and did I mention Yuck?). It needs to exist somewhere in
the caller's address space.
That name is still really un-helpful though. :( Please use something,
anything, other than a number (inconsistent with the rest of the PMAPI
and it says to the API user "I could not find words to describe this
thing").
In fact, double-underscore prefix is looking a really good option here
given the lack of certainty - please seriously consider that - we can
always add the PMAPI-level symbol later, once we've had more time to
consider and see what else comes up.
So, pick one of the above two approaches please, and if not settled on
a direction you're happy with by weeks end, lets yank this code and try
again next release?
I think that the double underscore prefix is a reasonable buffer against
invasive change and will probably go with that.
Dave
|