Re: DiskDevice API v2.4 remarks

On Mon, 02 Jun 2003 09:07:10 -0700 Tyler Dauwalder <tyler-cyCl/[email protected]
> wrote:
[...]
> > * Would watching disk systems make sense? We'll probably have to do
> > that in the kernel anyway, so it would take little to implement it.
> 
> Sure, why not. Something like this okay?:
> 
> B_DEVICE_REQUEST_DISK_SYSTEM = 0x0100,	// disk system addition/
> removal
> 
> B_DEVICE_DISK_SYSTEM_ADDED,			// disk system added
> B_DEVICE_DISK_SYSTEM_REMOVED,		// disk system removed

Yes, looks perfect.

> > * BDiskDevice::CommitModifications(): I know, I know, I proposed 
> > it,
> > but I don't think the template message is that good an idea. It 
> > would
> > mean passing a flattened version of it to the kernel and then 
> > further
> > to the registrar (if we indeed implement delivery of kernel
> > notification messages there). For rather little benefit, I believe.
> 
> :-) Fine by me if we get rid of it.

Cool.

> > * BPartition::VisitEachDescendent(): My dictionary tells me it 
> > should
> > read VisitEachDescendant. :-)
> 
> Yeah, I guess you're right. I have the hardest time with those 
> words... 
> :-)

No need to tell a non-native speaker. English is just a weird language. 
;-)
I'm afraid virtually every natural language is, though. :-)

CU, Ingo