From: Michael P. <mic...@gm...> - 2011-07-31 18:14:56
|
Peter Stuge wrote: >> It also needs to be documented that the function will allocate memory >> which must be free():d by the caller, if this behavior is neccessary >> for this function. To provide for the compromise that was made wrt choice of C runtime library, there would need to be a matching libusb function that calls free() internally. My recollection is that, with only one exception (which is not currently used on Windows anyway), free-ing data is always done by libusb, not the caller. >> I hope we can avoid it. Agreed. Michael |