On Wed, 12 Dec 2012 04:00:27 +0100 Stefan Tauner stefan.tauner@student.tuwien.ac.at wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 20:53:43 +0100 Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net wrote:
Is there a reason you introduce a .devices struct member inside struct programmer_entry in patch 1 just to rename it to .dev in patch 3?
not really (of course). probably some column limit made me do it :P which one do you prefer - devices or devs? i'll change the first patch accordingly if needed. if you (or anybody else for that matter) do not respond till i am ready with the patch set, then i will use 'devs'.
and more importantly: is that the only thing you want to discus about this patch? :)