On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 08:24:29AM +0100, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
>
> Hi Ezequiel,
>
> It is not a minor patch, but maybe you don't know about object
> programming.
>
> As it is defined, a gspca device _is_ a video device, as a gspca
> subdriver is a gspca device, and as a video device is a d
On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 15:59:50 -0300
Ezequiel wrote:
> Hi Jef,
>
> I just sent a patch to linux-media for this little issue.
>
> I realize it is only a very minor patch,
> so I am not sure If I am helping or just annoying the developers ;)
>
> Anyway, if you could check the patch I would appre
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:07:16AM +0100, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 15:19:04 -0300
> Ezequiel Garc??a wrote:
>
> > In 'media/video/gspca/gspca.c' I really hated this cast (maybe because
> > I am too dumb to understand it):
> >
> > gspca_dev = (struct gspca_dev *) video_d
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:07:16AM +0100, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 15:19:04 -0300
> Ezequiel Garc??a wrote:
>
> > In 'media/video/gspca/gspca.c' I really hated this cast (maybe because
> > I am too dumb to understand it):
> >
> > gspca_dev = (struct gspca_dev *) video_d
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 15:19:04 -0300
Ezequiel García wrote:
> In 'media/video/gspca/gspca.c' I really hated this cast (maybe because
> I am too dumb to understand it):
>
> gspca_dev = (struct gspca_dev *) video_devdata(file);
>
> wich is only legal because a struct video_device is the first mem
Hi folks,
In 'media/video/gspca/gspca.c' I really hated this cast (maybe because
I am too dumb to understand it):
gspca_dev = (struct gspca_dev *) video_devdata(file);
wich is only legal because a struct video_device is the first member
of gspca_dev. IMHO, this is 'unnecesary obfuscation'.
The
