Re: API Extensions

"Ingo Weinhold" <bonefish-CFLBMwTPW48UNGrzBIF7/[email protected]> wrote:
[...]
> Then there was a misunderstanding. The partition code is not 
> available 
> through the C++ API (unless the string is parsed), but I thought it 
> should still be kept in the extend=5Fpartition=5Finfo structure. Axel's 
> argument for that is, that a FS add-on should be able to check the 
> partition type for validity, but, rethinking the matter now, I don't 
> see why it shouldn't just check the string. I mean, it's not even 
> more 
> overhead, since it wouldn't need to parse the type string to get a 
> code, but could just compare the string directly.
> 
> I tend to schedule the field for removal. Any other arguments against 
> that=3F

What about: do as you like=3F ;-))

Adios...
   Axel.