Oh yes, it certainly is, but the defines are already reflecting what we need.

Is it so irrational that further discussion on that idea is void ?

manuel

On 6/29/05, BlueChip <cs_bluechip@webtribe.net> wrote:
> LOL ...now that's just abusive!
>
> Wish I'd thought of it :)
>
> BC
>
> >Hi all,
> >
> >why not apply a mechanism that takes advantage of the gcc-preprocessor ?
> >I didn't have a look at it, but I am pretty sure the gcc is able to
> >ONLY do the preprocessing stuff.
> >With that, strings could be #ifdef-ed like code, depending on features
> >and hardware limitations instead of model names.
> >#defines could be used to define the resume-key earlier and have it
> >replaced to the very string later on, not having to specify a second
> >and a third string that are 80% equal to each other.
> >
> >manuel
> >
> >On 6/29/05, Ronald Teune <rtwolf@gmx.net> wrote:
> > > Hi Daniel and others,
> > >
> > > In the draft I see no way to make a special translation for more than one
> > > model at once.
> > >
> > > Example:
> > >
> > > <source>
> > > *: "press PLAY to resume"
> > > h100,h300: "press SELECT to resume"
> > > ondiosp, ondiofm: "press anything you like to resume"
> > > recorderfm: "press fm button to resume"
> > > </source>
> > >
> > > Not sure if nobody has thought of this yet, or if it is just too much
> > > hassle to implement where some copypasting can do the job, too.
> > >

_______________________________________________
http://cool.haxx.se/mailman/listinfo/rockbox
Received on Wed Jun 29 09:16:20 2005