Re: [Jack-Devel] jack_free from when? and a couple of other things

On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 6:23 AM, Neil C Smith <[hidden]> wrote:

> OK.  The reason I asked is because JNAJack is a fairly
> straightforward, but OOP, mapping of the Jack API.  Almost all
> functions that require a client are mapped to methods on a client
> object.  This is one of a small set of functions that don't map neatly
> that way because you're not restricted to the ports from the client
> you pass in.

the only apps that would be affected that potential restriction are
those that want to offer generic connection utilities.

if you're not such an app, you don't need to care about the
possibility to use ports from other clients. if you ARE such an app,
you will be glad to have the possibility in place. if you want JNAJack
clients to be unable to play that role, feel free to impose the
restriction. otherwise, your API needs to take this into account, and
creating two different kinds of clients seems like overkill to me.

1322661938.32074_0.ltw:2,a <CAFa_cKk0H=-thNhk+G_e+drQH4TLw6dn051D31A8Fkr65au6yA at mail dot gmail dot com>